View
7
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
DOCUMENT RESUME
ED 378 736 EC 303 633
AUTHOR deNomme, Dennis A.TITLE Improving the Transition Process for Middle School
Learning Disabled Students Reentering the RegularClassroom through Student Accountability and TeacherInservice Training.
PUB DATE 18 Aug 94NOTE 108p.; Ed.D. Practicum Report, Nova Southeastern
University.PUB TYPE Dissertations/Theses Practicum Papers (043)
Tests /Evaluation Instruments (160)
EDRS PRICE MF01/PC05 Plus Postage.DESCRIPTORS Accountability; Inservice Teacher Education;
Intermediate Grades; Interpersonal Communication;Intervention; Junior High Schools; Junior High SchoolStudents; *Learning Disabilities; *Mainstreaming;*Middle Schools; *Regular and Special EducationRelationship; Resource Room Programs; StudentPlacement; Student Responsibility; *TransitionalPrograms
IDENTIFIERS Middle School Students
ABSTRACTThis practicum was designed to ensure that junior
high students with learning disabilities experience a successfultransition back into the regular classroom from the resource room.The focus was on increasing communication between the regularclassroom teacher and the resource room teacher, evaluatingtransition candidates using a competency-based criterion before theyexit from the resource room, and establishing support services forthe regular classroom teacher and the transition student. Thepracticum involved the development of a transition procedure as partof the student's individualized education plan, a writtencommunication flowchart, teacher responsibilities (regular classroomand resource room), modified resource room schedule, student profile,possible regular classroom modifications, daily and weeklyassessment, and inclusion of regular classroom teachers at specialeducation meetings. Analysis of the data revealed that successfultransitioning occurred following the practicum implementation.Student improvement occurred in the completion of regular classroomassignments and homework assignments, positive classroom behavior,and passing grades. Appendices contain copies of questionnaires andother practicum project materials. (Contains 22 references.) (JDD)
***********************************************************************
Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made *
from the original document.***********************************************************************
Improving the Transition Processfor Middle School Learning Disabled Students
Reentering the Regular ClassroomThrough Student Accountability and Teacher Inservice Training
by
Dennis A. deNomrne
Cluster 5?.a
A Practicum I Report Presented to theEd.D. Prngram in Child and Youth Studies
in Part Fulfillment of the Requirementsfor the Degree of Doctor of Education
NOVA SOUTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY
1994
BES1 COPY AVAILABLE
UAL DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONOffice or EducaticAuit Research and Imp :YementEDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFOR;..ATION
CENTER (ERIC)0/1';his document has been reproduced Is
received from the person or organizationoriginating it
0 Minor changes have been mad* to improvereproduction quality
Points ot view or opinions stilled in this docu-ment do not necessarily represent officialOERI position or policy
"PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THISMATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANT ED BY
A 21--9(-411.4A; a,
TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCESINFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)
PRACTICUM APPROVAL
This practicum took place as described.
Dr. Evel n Sanchez
Principal, Mountain Vista School
Title
2618 West El Paseo - Oracle, Arizona 89623
Address
June 15, 1994
Date
This practicum report was submitted by Dennis A. deNomme under the direction of
the adviser listed below. It was submitted to the Ed. D. Program in Child and Youth
Studies and approved in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor
of Education at Nova Southeastern University.
Approvai:
Date of Final Approval of Report
3
Staggs, Advi
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
While only the writer's name appears on this practicum study there are severalloved ones, colleagues, and professionals that provided the necessary chemistryfor its completion. My first, and foremost, gratitude goes to my wife Linda. If itwere not for her loving support, encouragement, and continual backing for all myeducational endeavors this practicum would not have been possible. My sincere
thanks also extends to my two sons, Derrick and Darren, who always providedencouragement and support.
I am indebted to Joan Tober, my proofreader and family friend for many years,
who, during this practicum process, carefully read every page and offered
comprehensive feedback and suggestions for improvement. I would also like to
extend my thanks to all my colleagues at the school where this practicum study
was implemented. I am especially grateful to: Dr. Sanchez, principal; junior
high school teachers; Dr. Skip Mc Grogan, psychologist; and Dr. Kathleen
Parkhust, former principal and superintendent.
I would also like to express my thanks and gratitude to all the faculty and staff at
Nova Southeastern University who were always there when I needed assistance
and questions answered. I am also thankful to: Dr. Grace Wright, Cluster 52
Coordinator; Dr. Deo Nellis, former Cluster 52 Coordinator; Dr. Mary EllenSapp, Director of Practicums; Dr. ,Lois Ann Hesser, Program Professor of
Education; Vera Flight, Coordinator of Graduate Student Development; and Dr.
Robert K. Green, Practicum Associate. Last, but certainly not least, I wish toexpend my gratitude and appreciation to Dr. Mary Staggs, Practicum Adviser, forher professional and verbal support throughout this practicum study.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT i i i
TABLE OF CONTENTS i v
LIST OF TABLES v i
LIST OF FIGURES v i i
ABSTRACT viii
Chapter
I INTRODUCTION
Description of Community 1
Writer's Work Setting and Role 2
I I STUDY OF THE PROBLEM
Problem Description 6Problem Documentation 8Causative Analysis 12Relationship of the Problem to the Literature 15
I I I ANTICIPATED OUTCOMES AND EVALUATION INSTRUMENTS
Goals and Expectations 23ExpectedOutcomes 23Measurement of Outcomes 24
IV SOLUTION STRATEGY
Discussion and Evaluation of Solutions 27Description of Selected Solution 36Report of Action Taken 40
V RESULTS, DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Results 44Discussion 60Recommendations 62Dissemination 63
'4v
TABLE OF CONTENTS cont.
Page
REFERENCES 65
Appendices
A SPECIAL EDUCATION QUESTIONNAIRE 67
B POSTTRANSITION QUESTIONNAIRE 70
C TRANSITION PROCEDURES FOR JUNIOR HIGH LEARNING DISABLEDSTUDENTS REENTERING THE REGULAR CLASSROOM 72
D FLOWCHART 74
E FLOWCHART DEFINITIONS 76
F TEACHER RESPONSIBILITIES DURING THE TRANSITION/MAINSTREAMPROCESS 78
G COMPETENCY-BASED APPROACH TO TRANSITIONING FOR JUNIORHIGH LEARNING DISABLED STUDENTS REENTERING THE REGULARCLASSROOM 81
H MODIFIED RESOURCE ROOM SCHEDULE 84
I JUNIOR HIGH STUDENT PROFILE FOR LEARNING DISABLED STUDENTSREENTERING THE REGULAR CLASSROOM 86
J POSSIBLE REGULAR CLASSROOM MODIFICATIONS TO ACCOMMODATELEARNING DISABLED STUDENTS 88
K DAILY EVALUATION CARD 91
L WEEKLY EVALUATION CARD 93
M A SPECIAL "IEP" INVITATION 95
N DEFINITIONS: TRANSITIONING/MAINSTREAMING 97
Table
LIST OF TABLES
1 Transitioning correlations from past studies
Page
22
2 Comparison of junior high transition/mainstream students completing/notcompleting in class and homework assignments for the first nine-week
grading period of the* 1993-1994 school year 47
3 Comparison of the total number of midterm failing notices submitted forjunior high transition/mainstream students the first, second, and thirdquarter of the 1992-1994 school year 49
4 Results of the posttransition questionnaire from regular classroomteachers 50
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
1 Results from Respondent's Choices on Question Number One 51
2 Results from the Pre and Postspecial Education Questionnaire for
Questions 2 through 25 5 3
v i i
rCI
ABSTRACT
Improving the Transition Process for Middle School Learning Disabled Students
Reentering the Regular Classroom through Student Accountability and Teacher
Inservice Training. deNomme, Dennis A., 1994: Practicum Report, NovaSoutheastern University, Ed. D. Program in Early and Middle Childhood.
Descriptors: Transition/Mainstream/Special Education/Middle School/LearningDisability/Competency-Based Assessment/Resource Room/MultidisciplinaryTeam/Individualized Education Plan/Modifications/Regular Classroom/lnserviceTraining/Intervention.This practicum was designed to ensure that junior high learning disabled students
receive a successful transition back into the regular classroom from theresource room. The focus was on increasing communication between the regularclassroom teacher and the resource room teacher, evaluating transition
candidates using a competency-based criterion before they exit from theresource room, and established support services for the regular classroomteacher and transition student. Data for this practicum was taken from currentliterature that revealed before successful transitioning can take place transitionprocedures need to be developed. Additional data was obtained from the regular
classroom teacher concerning their overall understanding of the school's current
special education procedures, learning disabilities and related deficits, andFederal legislation that relates to learning disabled students.
The writer developed a transition procedure; written communication flowchart;flowchart definitions; teacher responsibilities (regular classroom and resourceroom); modified resource room schedule; student profile; daily and weeklyevaluation assessment; and a special invitation inviting the regular classroomteachers to special education meetings.
Analysis of the data revealed successful transitioning occurred following the
practicum implementation. Student improvement occurred in the completion ofregular classroom assignments, homework assignments, and positive classroom
behavior. Additional results revealed an improvement in the number of midtermfailing notices submitted by regular classroom teachers and a markedimprovement towards passing grades on report cards.
viii
Permission Statement
As a student in the Ed.D. Program in Child and Youth Studies, I do (X) do not ( ) givepermission to Nova Southeastern University to distribute copies of this practicum report onrequest from interested individuals. It is my understanding that Nova Southeastern Universitywill not charge for this dissemination except to cover the costs of microfiching, handling, andmailing of the materials.
(fioDate Signature
0
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
Description of Community
The community and school where this practicum was implemented are
located in the southwestern United States. This small rural community sits at
the foot of a large mountain range at an altitude of 4500 feet. The community is
not supported by local manufacturing or farming therefore residents rely on a
larger nearby metropolitan area for employment. The community itself is not
experiencing rapid growth but recent development in the area poses the chance of
increased population and expanding industry. The socioeconomic composition of
the community is typical of many other small rural communities in the region.
The community's population consists of 4,700 residents with an ethnic
breakdown of 60% Anglo-American and 40% Hispanic.
The writer's school district is certified as an elementary district and
consists of two campuses. The preschool and kindergarten grades are on the
pt imary campus and the first through eighth grade is on the junior high campus.
The current enrollment for both campuses is just over 400 students. The school
district pays tuition to two nearby high schools for 256 students in grades 9
through 12. The nearby rural high school serves 148 of the high school students
while 108 attend a metropolitan high school. The district experiences some
fluctuation in student enrollment each year. Approximately 30 students enroll
2
and exit the district each year keeping the overall enrollment consistent from
year to year. In fact, many tenured teachers have taught second and third
generation students.
Writer's Work Setting and Role
The writer's work setting is located on the junior high campus. The
administrative structure of the campus is comparable to other small rural
school districts in that it consists of one principa! for all campus administration.
A fulltime psychologist handles all student supportive services including student
counseling, liaison for student services, testing coordinator, administering
psychoeducational evaluations, and acts as the administrator in the absence of the
campus principal. Between the two campuses there are twenty-seven certified
teachers for regular classroom instruction and seven teachers for the special
student population. Six fulltime aides assist the special student population
teachers to meet the needs of the students and their teachers.
The school district's mission statement outlines the district's philosophy
and its encouragement towards parental involvement in the school's day-to-day
activities. The mission statement also places an emphasis on every child's
inherent right to learn. This commitment to learning is evident in the teacher
and student ratio. The average class size is one teacher to twenty-two students.
Another reflection of the district's commitment to learning is witnessed by the
number of active parent volunteers in the district. Today, 41 participants
3
volunteer varying amounts of their time each week.
At the junior high level, special education functions on a resource room
schedule. The resource room currently has one fulltime special education
teacher certified in emotionally handicapped and learning disabled. One full-
time teacher's aide assists the teacher and students with day-to-day activities.
The current daily enrollment in the junior high resource room is fourteen
students from grades sixth through eighth. Each student attends the resource
r^esii daily for either math, reading or language or any combination of the three
areas depending on his or her deficiency. For grades fourth through sixth there
is one fulltime special education teacher who serves the gifted students and
learning disabled students. Grades first through third also has one fulltime
special education teacher and a fulltime teacher's aide. Instruction for students
in the preschool, preschool handicapped program, and kindergarten is provided
on the primary campus located across town. Other special areas provided for by
the district includes a Chapter I reading specialist, English as a second language
(ESL) specialist, and speech and language specialist. All the special programs
are supported fully and with enthusiasm from the district level administration to
the students.
The writer has an extensive background in education that includes
classroom experience and specialized certification. The writer currently holds a
Bachelor of Science in Education Degree and a Master of Science in Education
Degree. Each degree is in the area of special education and industrial arts
13
4
education. The writer has used the combination of the two degreed areas
extensively in most professional experiences. Each degreed area was chosen
particularly to support the field of working with handicapped children and young
adults from education through vocational training and work placement. During
the first five years of post-college employment the writer worked as the
director of a rehabilitation facility and a private school. Following the
directorship, the writer relocated to the sunbelt region of southwestern United
States. Following relocation, the writer returned to school and accumulated sixty
hours of continuing education beyond the Master's degree. The continuing
education was directed towards obtaining certification in learning disabilities and
school administration. The writer is currently in the second year of a doctoral
program for Child and Youth Studies specializing in special services and
exceptional children.
The writer has been in the field of special education for the past 22 years.
The first five year's experience was with private and state-sponsored special
education programs for high school age students and adult vocational educational
training. The majority of the student population during those years was
classified as either educable mentally handicapped (EMH), trainable mentally
handicapped (TMH), or multiple handicapped (MH). The remaining 17 year's
experience has been with public school programs for special education students
ranging from kindergarten to the twelfth grade.
The writer is certified in three educational areas: (1) administration
1 -1
5
(principal for kindergarten through twelfth grade), (2) special education
(learning disabled and emotionally disabled), and (3) regular education
(industrial arts education for kindergarten through twelfth grade).
The writer's current professional responsibility within the work setting
encompasses more than teaching junior high special education. The writer's
primary role deals directly with teaching junior high special education students
in a resource setting. Students attend the resource room for 47 minutes per
period for each core academic area in which they are identified as learning
disabled (LD). Students are mainstreamed into the regular classroom for all
other academic areas. The least restrictive environment (LRE) requirement
places the student in the resource room for needed academic intervention and
with their peers for social exposure and social development.
Like many other school districts, the writer's setting requires teachers to
wear many professional hats. The writer's current non-teaching
responsibilities include: (a) co-chair for all junior high Multidisciplinary
Team (MDT) meetings, (b) provide regular classroom observations, (c)
administer yearly norm reference tests for special education referrals and End
Of Year (EOY) reviews, (d) coordinate and develop Individualized Educational
Programs (IEP), and (e) serve on the Teacher Assistant Team (T,\T) that
reviews all academic and behavioral problems for junior high students.
10
CHAPTER II
STUDY OF THE PROBLEM
Problem Description
The academic and behavioral needs of junior high learning disabled students
were not being met in the regular classroom during the transition process. In
the writer's work setting, and for this practicum, transition students are
described as (a) those students that are placed in special education within the
category of students with "Specific Learning Disabilities" (SAD) as defined by
P.L. 94-142; (b) those students that are placed in the special education
resource room for their deficit areas and are mainstreamed out for regular
classroom instruction for science, social studies, computer education, art, and
physical education; and (c) those resource students that are placed in all regular
education classes on a fulltime schedule and are monitored by the resource room
teacher quarterly until they graduate from eighth grade.
Before the implementation of this practicum, students in transition
developed poor work habits, displayed inappropriate behavior, developed poor
social skills, did not complete homework assignments, and experienced !ow
academic achievement. This problem was apparent when midterm failure notices
were sent out and quarterly grades were issued. The majority of students in
transition failed because their academic and behavioral needs were not being met
in the regular classroom.
16
7
In the writer's work setting, transitioning was handled subjectively by the
resource room teacher because the resource room teacher was the professional
who worked the closest with the disabled students and was aware of their
academic and behavioral strengths and weaknesses. Transitioning from a more
restrictive environment to a least restrictive environment (regular classroom)
was not unjustified. The problem was the way transitions were handled. Some of
the past conflicts occurred due to the following reasons:
Disabled students achieved academic success in the resource room but
were unable to transfer it to the regular classroom.
Disabled student's behavior conflicted with the regular classroom
teacher's acceptable tolerance level.
Regular classroom teachers were not involved in the decision-making
process of the disabled student or the transition process back into the
regular classroom.
Disabled students were not able to handle the structure in the regularclassroom.
Disabled students could not keep up with the assigned classwork andhomework.
Regular classroom teachers expected the same academic and behavioral
performance from the disabled student as they did from the nondisabled
student.
Regular classroom teachers lacked special education training.
I(
8
Disabled students were graded on the same criteria as nondisabled
students.
Open communication was lacking between the resource room teacher and
the regular classroom teacher before, during, and after transition.
There was little or no follow-up services and student evaluation after
transition.
Disabled students passed even though they received failing grades.
Regular classroom teachers did not feel as though they had any input
regarding disabled students and the transition process.
Problem Documentation
One of the most discussed issues during teacher meetings and in
conversations between the writer (junior high resource room teacher) and
regular classroom teachers dealt with the difficulty regular classroom teachers
experienced with special education students that are transitioned into their
classroom. Practically every day regular classroom teachers discussed the
problem in passing on campus, between classes, on playground duty, and while
leaving school. To identify the problem areas the writer developed and
distributed a problem generation survey to each junior high teacher. This
survey was used as "food for thought" and was followed-up by an interview with
each junior high teacher. Results from interviewing each junior high teacher
revealed several obstacles existed for students in transition. The majority of the
l3'
9
regular classroom teachers expressed the following four concerns: (1) why did
failing students still receive passing grades, (2) the process of referring a
student to special education was confusing, (3) confusion and lack of knowledge
existed regarding learning disabled students, and (4) why did some students
qualify for special education and other students who are failing did not.
To define clearly the actual obstacles that existed the writer developed a
comprehensive Special Education Questionnaire (Appendix A). This
questionnaire solicited information from each junior high teacher relating to:
(1) their knowledge and understanding of special education, (2) their knowledge
of disabled student's behavior, and (3) their knowledge of Federal special
education legislation.
Results from the Special Education Questionnaire revealed several reasons
why the academic and behavioral needs of junior high learning disabled (LD)
students were not being met in the regular classroom during the transition
process. All the junior high teachers surveyed had a low preference towards
having learning disabled students in their classroom. A reason supporting this as
a problem was noted when most of the junior high teachers stated that they did
not understand the unique academic and social needs of the learning disabled
student. As a result, they felt they were unable to meet the academic and
behavioral needs of transitioned students through their current instructional
methods. When the junior high teachers were questioned about their
understanding of the failure syndrome (Harwell, 1989) the majority of the
10
teachers were unclear of its definition and how it can influence LD students'
academics. Most of the junior high teachers revealed that they had little
academic preparation to teach LD students and felt students in transition were
just "taking up a desk" and "socializing with their neighbors." These teachers
pointed out that the only time a transitioned student would do any work was
during one-to-one contact with the classroom teacher. The same group of
teachers also noted that they did not receive information about transitioned
students' academic ability or classroom behavior. As a result, teachers were left
wondering how to educate the learning disabled student in transition.
When junior high teachers were asked about their knowledge concerning
the criteria used for special education placement most of them had a limited
understanding. Failing LD students who were allowed to play sports was also a
major concern. Many of the junior high teachers were unaware of the school
district's "No Pass No Play" policy and how it affects academics and the LD
student. All junior high teachers noted the need to know and understand what can
be expected from transitioned students and were concerned as to why transitioned
students were unable to follow regular classroom directions and routines.
Junior high teachers also expressed the need for guidelines and follow-up
contacts after transitioned students were placed in their room.
After the questionnaire was reviewed and analyzed, the writer observed
three LD students in transition for one week covering nine forty-seven minute
class periods. During the observation period it was found that all three students
11
failed to follow verbal direction 80% of the time. This was occurring because:
(a) students were not paying attention, (b) students were being distracted by
other students or things in the classroom, and (c) students were not able to fully
understand what the teacher was trying to say. All three students were unsure of
assignments 75% of the time. This was a result of: (a) students not listening
when directions were given, (b) students arriving to class without paper and
pencil for writing down assignments, (c) students being preoccupied with
something else in the room, and (d) students not interested in getting the
assignment. In addition all three students were without necessary classroom
materials and books 90% of the time. Normally, students in the resource room
are supplied with all the necessary books and materials. Seldom are they
required to bring items with them or be responsible for taking materials out of
the room and returning them. None of the three students copied board
instructions into their assignment notebooks 80% of the time. Developing the
skills and responsibility to copy important information off the chalkboard is a
major obstacle for each transitioned student. Also, making sure they carry an
assignment notebook for recording this information is another difficulty. Two
students displayed inappropriate classroom behavior 90% of the time. The third
student's behavior was inappropriate 30% of the time. The third student was
more mature than the other two students thus accounting for better social
behavior. The two less mature students seemed to get encouragement from the
other students to act as class clowns or were enticed by others to display
12
inappropriate behavior. Most of the time the inappropriate behavior started
between classes and continued into the next class. This behavior syndrome was
consistent from class-to-class and teacher-to-teacher throughout the day.
There was one exception to the inappropriate behavior; one teacher would not
tolerate any inappropriate behavior. If transitioned students displayed
inappropriate behavior they would be sent to the office immediately. As a result,
the transitioned students were better behaved in this class but still were i-lot up
to the expected class norm.
Causative Analysis
Six obstacles were noted as causes for the academic and behavioral needs of
the learning disabled resource students not being met in the regular classroom.
The first cause was the lack of special education training for regular classroom
teachers in the area of serving LD students. Most universities only require
teachers to take an introductory course in special education for their education
degrees. This lack of undergraduate special education training becomes apparent
when regular classroom teachers have LD students transitioned into their
classrooms. Teachers find themselves at a loss in meeting the unique academic
and behavioral needs for LD students and this requires them to rely on outside
resources.
The second obstacle interfering with successful transitioning of LD students
2r)
13
can be seen in junior high teachers' choice towards having transitioned students
in their regular classroom. When teachers were asked about their preference
for having transitioned students in their classroom they responded in the
following manner: One out of eight junior high teachers preferred having
learning disabled students in the regular classroom with their peers, two out of
eight teachers preferred having all special education students in a self-contained
special education classroom, four out of eight teachers preferred the resource
room model the writer's school currently uses where students attend special
education classes for deficit areas only and one of the eight junior high teachers
preferred using an altogether alternative model. This alternative model would
mean placing learning disabled students in a self-contained special education
classroom for all their academics and having the resource room teacher follow
all regular classroom lesson plans. For example, each learning disabled student
would be doing exactly the same work as their peers with modification and
adaptation to accommodate individual student learning styles by the resource
room teacher. Phis alternative model is exactly opposite of special education's
mainstreaming and least restrictive environment requirements.
The third obstacle that became evident during teacher interviews related to
special education placement. Teachers felt that once students are placed in the
resource room they should remain there. Regular classroom teachers find it
difficult to adjust their teaching styles and curriculum to meet the academic
needs of students who fall outside the normal curve of academic achievement.
23
14
Regular classroom teachers' inability to adjust their teaching styles and
curriculum has a direct relationship to the success of transitioned students.
The fourth obstacle is that transitioned students lack the necessary
responsibility to succeed in the regular classroom environment. Transitioned
students who leave the resource room and reenter the regular classroom are
accustomed to having no responsibility other than getting to class on time. They
are used to a small class size, one-to-one or small group instruction, having all
of their instructional information hand-delivered in a tailored fashion,
immediate response on assignments, and a no-failure environment.
The fifth obstacle is that regular classroom teachers did not have quality
follow-up from the resource teacher on their transitioned students. Teachers
felt that once students are transitioned back into the regular classroom they are
expected to take on all the responsibility without any assistance or guidance.
George & Lewis (1991) pointed out in their article that little information exists
for teachers when it comes to specific steps to follow when transitioning students
into the regular classroom (p. 34).
The sixth obstacle involved regular classroom teachers who did not
understand the role of the resource room teacher in the child's educational
process. Half of the junior high teachers had little working knowledge of the
school's special education program. Only half of the junior high teachers had a
knowledgeable understanding of least restrictive environment (LRE) and how it
applies to the LD student.
2
15
Each area taken individually was not enough to create a major obstacle on
its own, but combined with all the other causes, they did present a significant
hindrance for successful transitioning of learning disabled students from the
resource room back into the regular classroom.
Relationship of the Problem to the Literature
The Education for All Handicapped Children Act (EHCA) provides an
extensive outline of requirements for placing a student into special education.
This, combined with state and local school district requirements, ensures a
tailored procedure for entry into special education by disabled students.
However, little attention is being placed on exiting students out of direct special
education services and transitioning them back into mainstream education
(Grosenick, George and George,1988). The EHCA's regulations state that each
public agency shall insure: (1) that to the maximum extent appropriate,
handicapped children, including children in public or private institutions or
other care facilities, are educated with children who are not handicapped; and
(2) that special classes, separate schooling or other removal of handicapped
children from the regular educational environment occurs only when the nature
or severity of the handicap is such that education in regular classes with the use
of supplementary aids and services cannot be achieved satisfactorily (34 C.F.R. §
300.550(b)). This legislation, and the mainstreaming component, is what
every school district deals with each time they place a student in special
16
education. It is also the main focus behind this practicum. For the past nine
years the writer has been teaching in the school setting where this practicum
was implemented. During that time, mainstreaming of disabled students into
regular classroom environments has been the number one problem within the
special education program and what the regular classroom teacher fears most.
The force behind mainstreaming started with the passage of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (P.L. 93-112). This particular law created
individual sections relating to discrimination. Section 504 of P.L. 93-112
states thai no individual, regardless of the severity of their disability, can be
discriminated against. P.L. 93-112 was further strengthened by the passage of
the Education for all Handicapped Children Act of 1975 (EHCA), (P.L. 94-142).
This law explains the rights for all handicapped children and their education.
P.L. 94-142 provides for:
...a free appropriate public education for all children with disabilities,
ensures due process rights, mandates education in the least restrictive
environment, and mandates Individualized Education Proarams, among
other things. It is the core of federal funding for special education (Horne,
1991, p. 12).
One of the main components of P.L. 94-142 is the least restrictive
environment (LRE) requirement. The LRE states that each student will receive
his or her education in an environment with the least restriction and the LRE
needs to be stated in each student's Individualized Education Program (IEP). So,
17
what does all this legislation mean? P.L. 94-142 plainly states:
...to the maximum extent appropriate, handicapped children, including
children in public or private institutions or other care facilities, [should
be] educated with children who are not handicapped, and that separate
schooling, or other removal of handicapped children from the regular
educational environment [should] occur only when the nature or severity of
the handicap is such that education in regular classes with the use of
supplementary aids and services cannot be achieved
satisfactorily... (Rothstein, 1990, p. 109).
Salend (1990) points out some of the problems associated with
mainstreaming. Salend says the regular classroom teacher is not trained to work
with disabled students, instructing disabled students will take too much time
away from nonhandicapped students, regular classroom teachers and
nonhandicapped students have negative attitudes toward handicapped students, the
regular classroom environment is not able to handle handicapped students, and
research has not established that the regular classroom environment will
produce positive academic gains or results. Salend also states that many
professionals feel special education classes for handicapped students "will
protect them from the harmful effects of repeated failures that they will
experience in the regular education setting" (p. 18).
Many school districts, as is true in the writer's district, fail to change
their educational environment and instructional methods when transitioning
18
students back into mainstream education. Stainback, Stainback, Courtnage, and
Jaben (1985) revealed that because districts do not have established
mainstreaming guidelines, program placement is the least expensive alternative
rather than the least restrictive alternative. Salend, Brooks, and Salend (1987)
surveyed several special education administrators and found that although they
supported the philosophy of mainstreaming, few had established procedures to
follow when mainstreaming students back into the regular classroom. As a
result, most mainstreaming was handled on an informal basis between the
regular classroom teacher and the special education teacher.
Teachers thoroughly understand that scheduling is a major problem when
mainstreaming students back into the regular classroom. Wood (1989)
surveyed regular classroom teachers and found they had difficulty with
transition students because transition students: (1) have difficulty functioning
in groups, (2) are excused for certain class projects and assignments, (3)
follow a different standard for grading, (4) have trouble completing classroom
assignments, (5) are not able to cope with the change when they enter the
regular classroom, (6) are not able to take part in all regular classroom
activities, and (7) forget to bring to bring the necessary classroom material
with them to class.
Meier (1992) found that mainstreaming handicapped students into the
regular classroom created problems because of the attitude regular classroom
teachers had towards handicapped students combined with their lack of
19
appropriate training. Meier also found that regular classroom teachers had
difficulty understanding their role and responsibilities in the mainstreaming
process. Meier states that regular classroom teachers indicated in his research
that "mainstreaming, exceptional needs students, and students with cultural
differences were not applicable to their positions" (p. 338). Meier pointed out
that regular classroom teachers felt they were members of a professional team
and were not adequately prepared to meet the needs of special education students.
Johnson and Johnson (1980) identified four problems that can occur when
acceptive and supportive relationships do not exist between handicapped students
and the nonhandicapped students. First, students are not assigned to groups to
maximize the heterogeneity of a group. This can be overcome if the regular
classroom teacher plans the groups to consist of high, low, and average students.
Also, a group ratio of three nonhandicapped and one handicapped is suggested.
Second, classrooms are not arranged to meet the handicapped student's learning
and behavioral needs. Johnson and Johnson suggest seating group members in a
way that they all have eye-to-eye contact, equal distance between each other, a
clear vision of the chalkboard or teaching aids, and adequate hearing distance. By
following these suggested room arrangements most obstacles that may hinder
learning and interactivity could be eliminated. The third problem deals with
using inappropriate educational materials when teaching transitioned students.
This can be detrimental for a transitioned student because handicapped students
who are not familiar with materials may not feel confident enough to take an
2J
20
active part in group discussions. Adjusting materials to provide the student with
the needed information for discussion or correct responses will help build the
student's confidence level. The final problem focuses on the special education
teacher and regular classroom teacher not working together as a collaborative
team. This is a major obstacle for a successful transition. There needs to be
open communication between the regular classroom teacher and the resource
room teacher. A working relationship can be established through team teaching,
observing students as they work, and helping the regular classroom teacher to
identify problems in cognitive processing and social functioning. The resource
room teacher can also assist the regular classroom teacher with information and
input on the regular class student body.
When handicapped students reenter the regular classroom teachers often
find alternative grading creates additional recordkeeping and consumes planning
time. In some cases this may be true, but if the handicapped students' grades are
to be fair and accurate, grading procedures need to change and "grades must begin
to provide more descriptive information by showing individual student's gains
and identifying specific needs for improvement" (Vasa, 1981, p. 16). Grades
for nonhandicapped students in the regular classroom are often determined on
written work and written tests. Handicapped students will find this type of
assessment devastating and overwhelming. Teachers can adjust their grading
procedures to include the following student performance areas in their
recordkeeping: (1) class interaction and discussion, (2) class projects and/or
21
activities, (3) verbal reports, (4) interviews with the student, (5) anecdotalrecords of student performance, and (6) a daily log of student activities.
Vasa states by implementing some of the above activities little modificationwill need to take place in the regular grading system. Adjusting the evaluationprocedure takes the emphasis away from standards and shifts it to reporting whatskills are mastered. However, if the regular classroom teacher has a preferenceand prefers alternative grading they can follow these four practices: (1)contracts, (2) pass/fail, (3) letter or numeral grade, and (4) checklist.
Other areas that are successful when using alternative grading proceduresinclude: (1) verbal tests, (2) adjusting the length of tests, (3) adjusting thelevel of questions, (4) cutting down on the frequency of tests, (5) adjusting thetime limits for each test, (6) adjusting the type of responses, and (7) using
course projects. Vasa concludes by stressing teachers must be: (1) wellorganized, (2) goal orientated, (3) systematic, and (4) able to design
appropriate ways of measuring student achievement.
Information from literature that the writer reviewed for this practicumshows close correlation between independent studies and research. Table 1 showsthe correlation between the writer's research of past studios dealing with
transitioning and/or mainstreaming (George and Lewis, 1991; Meier, 1992;Stainback et al. 1985; Ariel, 1992; Salend, 1990; and Wood, 1989). Allauthors support the areas this practicum focused on to improve the transition
31
22
process for learning disabled students reentering the regular classroom from the
resource room.
Table 1
Transitionino Correlations From Past Studies
Procedures
George and Meier Stainback et al.
Authors
WoodSalendLewis (1992) (1985) (1990) (1989)
(1991)
Outline Procedures yes yes yes yes yes
Assessing Regular yes yes yes yes yesClassroom
Change ResourceRoutines & MaterialsTo Match Regular Class yes yes yes yes yes
Change Attitude ofRegular Class Teacher yes yes yes yes yes
Change Attitude ofRegular Class Students yes yes yes yes yes
Assess Readiness of yes yes yes yes yesDisabled Student
Ongoing Evaluation & yes yes yes yes yesFollow-up
Inservice Training for yes yes yes yes yesRegular Class Teachers
Peer-Tutor With yes yes yes yes yesDisabled Students
CHAPTER III
ANTICIPATED OUTCOMES AND EVALUATION INSTRUMENTS
Goals and Expectations
The goal of this practicum was to meet the academic and behavioral needs of
junior high learning disabled students while they are in transition. Transition
applies to students that are placed in the special education resource room for
their deficit areas and mainstreamed out for regular classroom instruction.
Within the writer's school, students are generally mainstreamed for social
studies, science, computer training, art, and physical education. Transition also
applies to students who have been placed in all regular education classes full time
and are monitored by the resource room each quarter until they graduate from
eighth grade.
Expected Outcomes
There were five expected outcomes for the 15 students and 8 teachers
involved in this practicum. The first outcome was that each junior high learning
disabled student in transition would complete 90% of their regular classroom
assignments. These included classroom assignments as well as homework
assignments. The second outcome was that junior high learning disabled students
in transition would earn at least a passing grade in each subject. The third
outcome was that receiving teachers of transitioned students would be provided
'3 3
24
information regarding the transitioned student's academic and behavioral
characteristics. The fourth outcome was that receiving teachers of transitioned
students would have information and knowledge of the criteria used for special
education placement. The fifth, and final, outcome was that receiving teachers
would be knowledgeable of the academic and behavioral needs for each student in
transition.
Measurement of Outcomes
The resource room teacher consulted with the regular teachers every third
week to determine if the transitioned/mainstreamed students were passing 90%
of the time. The monitoring was accomplished by providing regular classroom
teachers with a district sponsored feedback form. This evaluation form was given
to each teacher who had learning disabled (LD) students in their class on a three-
week rotation basis throughout the practicum study. The regular classroom
teacher filled out the feedback form and returned it to the principal for
informational purposes. The feedback form was returned to the building
principal first because the principal takes a very proactive role in the education
of LD students. The principal, in turn, returned the summary to the resource
room teacher. Early in the practicum study several of the already mainstreamed
students were receiving failing grades. As a result, the "Daily Evaluation Card"
(Appendix K) and "Weekly Evaluation Card" (Appendix L) was designed and
distributed accordingly to keep from waiting for the district's every third-week
3 1
25
feedback form to circulate. The second monitoring consisted of a scheduled
monthly meeting between the regular classroom teacher and the resource room
teacher. During this meeting each transitioned/mainstreamed student's academic
achievement and behavior were reviewed and the necessary intervention was
designed. As a result of these meetings the regular classroom teachers began
expressing satisfaction with the new transition procedure and the improved
student behavior and academic achievement.
Each receiving teacher of transitioned students was given information
regarding the transitioned student's academic achievement and behavioral
characteristics. This resulted in fewer referrals for disruptive behavior
because the regular classroom teachers understood beforehand individual student
behaviors and were prepared to provide immediate intervention. Each receiving
teacher of transitioned students was provided the criteria used for special
education placement and transitioning for each student one month before the
transition. By providing the regular classroom teacher with this information
before the student arrived, the regular classroom teacher had a clearer
understanding of the student's deficits and had preestablished measures to meet
the academic and behavioral needs of each student.
Receiving teachers filled out a Postthinsition Questionnaire (Appendix B)
after each new transitioned student reentered their regular classroom. The
Posttransition Questionnaire assessed the regular classroom teacher's knowledge
regarding whether the following four items had been provided for them: ( 1 )
26
initial criteria and qualification data that placed the student in special education,
(2) criteria used to place the student into transition, (3) knowledge of the
student's special academic needs and requirements, and (4) knowledge of the
student's unique behavioral characteristics. Also, receiving teachers filled out a
Posttransition Questionnaire at the end of the grading period to assess whether
they received the necessary support services as explained in the new transition
procedure. Results from the surveys clearly demonstrated that each regular
classroom teacher had received all the prescribed assistance as defined in the
transition procedures.
3C
CHAPTER IV
SOLUTION STRATEGY
Discussion and Evaluation of Solutions
Junior high learning disabled students academic and behavioral needs were
not being met as they transitioned out of the resource room and reentered the
regular classroom environment. The academic and behavioral needs of students
that were already placed in the mainstream for regular class science, social
studies, computer education, art, and physical education were also not being met.
As a result, students in transition or already in the mainstream were developing
poor work habits, displaying inappropriate behavior, developing poor social
skills, were not completing homework assignments, and were experiencing low
academic achievement.
George & Lewis (1991) pointed out in their recent study that specific
steps for implementing a smooth transition from special to regular education
have been lacking in the literature. They described their four phase process that
uses data-based decision-making about each student's readiness to reintegrate
back into the mainstream. The four phases focus on the following areas: (1) the
student's initial IEP meeting; (2) incorporating pre-exit activities into three
steps that include assessing the least restrictive setting, emulating or
approximating regular classroom routines in the special class setting, and
assessing the student's readiness to transition; (3) the actual transition; and (4)
28
guidelines for follow-up and evaluation. Following George & Lewis' research the
writer's first idea involved including an actual transition procedure in each
special education student's individualized educational plan (IEP). By including a
transition procedure in the student's IEP receiving teachers were assured that
the student in transition had indeed met the necessary criteria needed to exit the
resource room and reenter the regular classroom. Each student who became a
candidate for transitioning had documented evidence indicating that they were
ready to transition. A transition procedure addressed the primary concern
George and Lewis (1991) expressed when they said few guidelines are available
for teachers to follow when transitioning resource students out of the resource
room and back into the regular classroom.
Hundert (1982) presented several areas that would provide support for
transitioning handicapped students back into mainstream education. Hundert's
areas consisted of: (1) selection of a candidate to transition, (2) evaluate the
regular classroom environment to ensure the transition will result in the
student's least restrictive environment, (3) prepare the receiving teacher, (4)
establish a support service plan, and (5) develop an inservice training plan for
teachers. Two common support services used during transition are teacher
consulting and the resource room teacher going directly into the regular
classroom and working with the student. Hundert states that if the latter support
service is used it should be gradually withdrawn leaving the regular classroom
teuLher with the consultative model. Hundert's final consideration focuses on
3o
29
developing a clear plan. This plan should include a description of the objectives
for placing the student in the regular classroom, the actual mechanics of the
transfer, all the programs and services that will be available to the teacher and
the student, and a schedule for evaluating the student's progress. Hundert points
out that once this plan is developed it needs to be reviewed by the student's
multidisciplinary team. One suggestion offered was to place the student in the
regular classroom for one period per day and once the student becomes
comfortable with the environment the time can be lengthened. Hundert feels by
first placing the student in the regular classroom for short periods it will enable
the student to become acclimated to the new environment and thus ensure a
successful transition. Hundert concluded his findings by stating the two most
successful factors affecting whether a transition will be successful focuses on:
(1) early involvement of the regular classroom teacher in the decision-making
process and (2) prioritizing the needs of the handicapped student in the regular
classroom environment.
Following Hundert's research the writer developed a competency-based
assessment to evaluate whether a resource student was ready to transition out of
the resource room and reenter the regular classroom. Also, by preparing the
receiving teacher through inservice training before a transitioned student
entered their classroom he!ped them overcome any uncertainties they had
regarding a student's educational and behavioral needs. Tymitz-Wolf, (1982)
stated that before transitioning can be successful, inservice training needs to be
30
held on a regular basis. Salend and Johns (1983) explained that inservice
trainers should focus on skills development for regular classroom teachers thus
enabling them to overcome or compensate for their feelings of inadequacy. The
writer followed Salend and John's suggestion and prioritized inservice training
around the areas listed on the Special Education Questionnaire (Appendix A).
Inservice training for junior high teachers in the area of special education is now
going to be a yearly event.
Past transitions left the regular classroom teacher without any type of
support services once a transition was complete. Now a support plan for each
teacher benefits the transition process through letting the regular classroom
teacher know there is support when unexpected problems arise.
Students who are now being considered for transitioning and/or
mainstreaming meet an established criterion. Salend (1984) proposes the
following six factors to consider when transitioning/mainstreaming students
back into the regular classroom: (1) develop criteria for mainstreaming, (2)
prepare handicapped students, (3) prepare nonhandicapped students, (4)
establish open communication among educators, (5) evaluate student progress,
and (6) provide teacher inservice training. Salend & Lutz (1984) identified 15
social skill competencies needed by the student before successful mainstreaming
can take place. They placed these competencies in the following three general
categories: (1) interaction with peers, (2) following classroom rules, and (3)
using appropriate classroom work habits. They said using a competency-based
31
approach to identifying critical regular classroom academics and behavioral
skills will ensure successful mainstreaming.
The resource room teacher begins the follow-up process after the LD
student's transition into the regular classroom. Salend (1984) suggests waiting
several weeks to enable the transitioned student enough time to get used to the
new environment. After reentry, Salend suggests collecting evaluation
information and data from three sources: (1) regular classroom teacher, (2)
student's parents, and (3) the student. He says the regular classroom teacher
can provide academic data from criterion-referenced tests.
Since the writer's overall goal was to improve the transition process for
junior high learning disabled students reentering the regular classroom from the
resource room the writer considered research that improved the transition ,
process. Each idea focused around two objectives. The first, to ease the burden
regular classroom teachers felt when transitioned or mainstreamed students
reentered their classroom and second, by shifting more responsibility and
accountability to the learning disabled students for their education. Easing the
burden regular classroom teachers felt when they had LD students placed in their
class improved the educational effort they made towards educating each LD
student while at the same time improving the overall academic environment.
Also, having ea,s.h LD student take more responsibility for their academics and
behavior provided them with the skills needed for success in the regular
classroom realm as well as in future endeavors.
41
32
Developing a written communication flowchart, (Appendix D) combined
with definitions (Appendix E) explaining each step on the flowchart, cleared-up
many misunderstandings when students were transitioned and/or mainstreamed
back into the regular classroom. Before this practicum study the district was
already using a feedback form for periodic assessment of transitioned and/or
mainstreamed students. However, regular classroom teachers were still
confused as to the overall process of the feedback form and the procedure
necessary to make changes within a transitioned/mainstreamed student's least
restrictive environment (LRE). The written communications flowchart
combined with flowchart definitions provided each regular classroom teacher
with a pictorial reference during needed interventions.
Designing a list of teacher responsibilities (Appendix F) cleared-up
ongoing concerns for regular classroom teachers. Now, the resource room
teacher and the regular classroom teacher are aware of each other's roles when
students are transitioned/mainstreamed into the regular classroom. Schultz,
Carpenter, and Turnbull (1991) state that the essence of mainstreaming is
shared responsibility between all educators within each facility. Ariel (1992)
also emphasizes shared responsibility by stating that the school administration
along with all support personnel needs to take the team approach to
mainstreaming to guarantee the best education program as possible for each
student.
By combining the resource room curriculum and the targeted regular
4 2
33
classroom curriculum for 30 days before transitions took place integrated the
transition candidate's academic strength with the regular classroom curriculum.
Hundert (1982) supports the theory that students need to move slowly back into
the regular classroom setting transitioning/mainstreaming is to be successful.
Using a 30-day exposure to the actual classroom setting prepared the transition
candidate academically and behaviorally. Saiend (1990) states, "Prior to being
mainstreamed, the student should be exposed to the textbooks and instructional
materials used in the regular classroom" (p. 87). This 30-day period also
allowed enough time for the regular classroom teacher and the resource room
teacher to communicate more openly, become familiar with each other's
classroom and materials, and established a working relationship aimed at
successful transitioning of the student.
To help clear up the regular classroom teacher's uncertainties about the
resource student's academic and behavioral strengths and weaknesses a student
profile was provided before the student entered their classroom. By making the
regular classroom teacher aware of the unique qualities of the transition
candidate the teacher was able to establish realistic expectations that ensured the
transition student more opportunity for success in the regular classroom
environment. Teachers also used the student profile when they felt new
intervention strategies were needed within a student's program. The writer feels
the more information a regular classroom teacher has about their
transitioned/mainstreamed students the more they are able to provide positive
43
34
academic and behavioral intervention.
Before this practicum was implemented, regular classroom teachers had
little help with transitioned/mainstreamed students in their classroom. Results
obtained from the special education questionnaire (Appendix A) pointed out that
regular classroom teachers had little training and/or experience in the area of
special education. The regular classroom teacher received support and relief of
frustration when provided with a list of possible classroom modifications
(Appendix J). The list was only meant as "possible modifications" and regular
classroom teachers were encouraged to use "what works best for them and their
transition/mainstream students." The list of possible modifications helped the
regular classroom teacher to adjust the classroom environment to provide each
transitioned/mainstreamed student with an environment that was conducive to
academic success.
The school's existing feedback form was currently circulated to regular
classroom teachers on a three-week rotation and had been successful for: (1)
helping the transitioned/mainstreamed student keep current with missing
assignments, (2) providing behavioral intervention, and (3) assisting the
regular classroom teacher with particular needs. However, when the writer
implemented this practicum it became obvious that several mainstream students
had immediate needs that could not be contingent on the three-week evaluation
cycle. To address the transitioned/mainstreamed student's immediate needs the
writer envisioned using a Daily Evaluation Card (Appendix K) and a "Weekly
4.1
35
Evaluation Card" (Appendix L). The daily and weekly evaluation card did not
supplant the three-week rotation evaluation but only served to support the form.
The new evaluation cards gave the regular classroom teachers a quick and easy
mean for enacting immediate intervention for poor academic performance and
disruptive behavior. Teachers also received immediate assistance with other
problems when they made note of their need in the comment section on either
card. These evaluation cards also gave each transitioned/mainstreamed student
the opportunity to increase their personal responsibility. The transitioned
and/or mainstreamed students were required to: (1) present the evaluation card
to the teacher (daily or weekly), (2) collect the evaluation card at the end of the
period, (3) return the evaluation card to the resource room teacher or the
teacher's mailbox before leaving school.
Clearing up the confusion regular classroom teachers had concerning the
difference between a teacher assistance team (TAT) meeting and a
multidisciplinary conference (MDC) was another idea the writer felt was
necessary to improve the regular classroom teacher's involvement in the IEP
decision-making process. Before the practicum study, TAT notices were, and
still are, used for both meetings. As a result, the writer realized teachers should .
receive some sort of notice or invitation alerting them that the upcoming meeting
was a MDC and not a general TAT. To clarify the difference between the two
meetings the writer developed and issued an "IEP" invitation (Appendix M)
notifying the regular classroom teacher that the upcoming meeting will be
45
36
addressing the needs of a special education student. The invitation personalized
the meeting process and recognized each teacher's professional expertise.
Because of the number of implemented changes associated with this
practicum study the writer felt teachers would need an overall explanation for
each new form and process (Appendix N). Regular classroom teachers were able
to refer to this explanation for immediate answers when difficulties arose during
the transition/mainstream process for each student. The writer also realized
during implementation that closure needed to be developed for this practicum. As
a result, the writer developed the posttransition questionnaire (Appendix B).
The questionnaire addressed the areas the regular classroom teacher needed
follow-up services with when transitioned/mainstreamed students reentered
their classroom. The questionnaire also provided the writer with a means of
evaluating transition procedure and its 12 components between the regular
classroom teacher, the resource room teacher, and the transitioned and/or
mainstreamed students.
Description of Selected Solution
The review of literature suggested that before a successful transition can be
implemented guidelines need to be established supporting reentry into the
regular classroom structure. The literature review emphasized this by stating
that without an established procedure the special education student in transition
is bound to fail. Also, procedures to support successful transitioning need to be
4 6
37
tailored to the individual school environment, regular classroom environment,
regular classroom teacher, and the student reentering the mainstream of
education. With this protocol in mind the writer selected the following solution
to improve the transition process for learning disabled student's reentry into the
regular classroom. The solution involved implementing a transition procedure
(Appendix C) as part of the student's individualized education plan (IEP). This
procedure outlined the exact steps students would follow once they became a
candidate to transition back into the regular classroom. The primary solution for
this practicum was the development of a transition procedure to be included in
each student's IEP. This solution consisted of 12 other components that the
writer developed and implemented. They are as follows:
1. A Written Communication Flowchart (Appendix D). The flowchart
illustrated the procedures for written communication between the
regular classroom teacher and the resource room teacher for
transitioned/mainstreamed students. The flowchart also followed the
district's special education feedback form.
2. Flowchart Definitions (Appendix E). The flowchart definitions were
developed to explain the communication process for transitioned and/or
mainstreamed students and to detail the exact function within each area
of the flowchart for each junior high teacher.
3. Teacher Responsibilities (Appendix F). This component identified the
responsibilities of the regular classroom teacher and the resource room
4!
38
teacher regarding transitioned/mainstreamed students during the
transition/mainstream process.
4. Competency-Based Assessment Checklist (Appendix G). The checklist
identified the competencies that were necessary prerequisites for
readiness, behavior, and academics for LD students' reentry into the
regular classroom.
5. Modified Resource Room Schedule (Appendix H). Each candidate for
transitioning followed a modified resource room schedule emulating the
regular classroom's instructional and behavioral environment 30 days
before reentering the regular classroom. This new resource room
procedure exposed the transition candidates to the competencies and
demands that will be required of him/her in the regular classroom.
6. Student Profile (Appendix I). Information for the regular classroom
teacher concerning the student's academic and behavioral
characteristics, mainstream schedule, date of reentry, resource
assistance, and the criteria used in qualifying the student for
transitioning.
7. Possible Regular Classroom Modifications (Appendix J). The list of
possible modifications the teacher could use to adjust the regular
classroom environment, adjust instructional material, adjust teacher
management techniques, adjusting teaching techniques, and adjusting the
student assignments.
4
39
8. Daily Evaluation Card (Appendix K) and Weekly Evaluation Card
',Appendix L). The evaluation cards were used by the regular classroom
teacher for a quick daily or weekly evaluation of the student's
academics and behavior and to request immediate intervention from the
resource room teacher. The transitioned/mainstreamed student was
required to fill out the personal data on the card, submit the card to the
regular classroom teacher, and collect and return the card to the
resource room teacher which helped to develop personal responsibility
skills for the student.
9. A Special IEP Invitation (Appendix N). This component established a
clear difference, for regular classroom teachers, between a teacher
assistant team (TAT) meeting that addresses the academic and/or
behavior problems for all junior high students verses a
multidisciplinary conference (MDC) that addresses the special
education student's total needs.
1 0. Definitions for Components (Appendix N). These definitions were
designed to provide the regular classroom teacher with a quick and
continuous clarification of what was involved with the new transition
procedure, forms, and processes.
1 1. Teacher Inservice Training. The inservice training focused on the new
transition procedure, forms, and processes; the unique academic and
behavioral needs of the learning disabled student; and Federal
4 3
40
legislation mandating special education within public schools.
Individual discussion topics and presentations addressed all the items
stated in the special education questionnaire.
1 2. A Posttransition Questionnaire (Appendix B). This component brought
closure and clarification to the new transition procedure, its forms,
and processes. It also provided the writer with response and ongoing
evaluation from the regular classroom teachers as to whether or not the
new procedure, forms, and processes were meeting the teacher's needs
and the needs of the transitioned/mainstreamed students.
The new aforementioned transition procedure, its forms, and processes
have been successfully implemented and were enclosed in a Transition Procedure
Notebook and distribution to each junior high teacher throughout the
implementation period. The regular classroom teachers were encouraged to use
the notebook to keep and file all special education information they receive
throughout each school year.
Report of Action Taken
During the first two weeks of this practicum the writer met with the school
principal and junior high teacher to review the practicum, the expected benefits
resulting from the practicum, and the timeline for each step during
implementation. The end of week two coincided with midterm reporting period
for the second quarter. The writer surveyed the special education students'
41
midterm failing notices (Table 3) to compare the number of failing notices for
pre /postpracticum evaluation.
During the third week of implementation a transition procedure (Appendix
C) was developed for inc!usion in each student's individualized education plan
(IEP). This procedure outlined the exact steps students followed once they
became a candidate to transition back into the regular classroom. Developing a
transition procedure and including it as part of each student's IEP was the
primary focus for this practicum. By the end of the fourth week a flowchart for
communication (Appendix D) and flowchart definitions (Appendix E) were
distributed to each junior high teacher.
During the fifth week the Daily Evaluation Card (Appendix K) and the
Weekly Evaluation Card (Appendix L) replaced the participant's unexpected
events journal. The change in procedure was made to compensate for the
district's currently used special education feedback form. Rationale for the
change was based on the fact that many of the students already in the mainstream
process had immediate needs that required a procedure for immediate
intervention. Many teachers were also in need of a procedure that would provide
them with immediate classroom intervention. By the end of the sixth week each
junior high teacher had received a copy of teacher responsibilities (Appendix F)
that were used during the transition or mainstream process.
The following week, week seven, the writer implemented a modified
resource room procedure (Appendix H) that transitioned candidates followed for
42
30 days before reentry into the regular classroom. During week eight a student
profile (Appendix I) was developed and distributed to each teacher receiving
transitioned/mainstreamed students. During week nine a list of possible regular
classroom modifications (Appendix J) was developed and distributed to each
junior high teacher. The regular classroom teacher began using the
modifications to improve the learning environment for transitioned and/or
mainstreamed students.
During the following two weeks the writer provided inservice training for
each junior high teacher. The inservice training was only required for junior
high teachers but the writer issued an open invitation to all district teachers.
The content of the inservice training focused around the survey questions in the
special education questionnaire (Appendix A). For teachers who were unable to
attend because of conflicting schedules the writer held individual inservice
sessions at a more convenient time. All junior high teachers were inserviced
either during the group inservice training program or on an individual basis
within the tenth and eleventh week of the practicum.
During the twelfth and final week of implementation, the writer realized a
procedure was needed to bring closure to the 12 components. A posttransition
questionnaire (Appendix B) was developed and distributed to each junior high
teacher enabling the writer to have a means of quarterly evaluation and ongoing
comments from the regular classroom teachers. The posttransition questionnaire
keeps the writer abreast of the effectiveness of the new transition procedure, its
43
forms, and processes. It also provides the writer with an ongoing quantifiable
job performance evaluation regarding the goal of meeting the needs of the regular
classroom teachers and the transitioned/mainstreamed students.
CHAPTER V
RESULTS, DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Results
The academic and behavioral needs of the junior high learning disabled
students (LD) were not being met when they transitioned out of the resource
room and reentered the regular classroom. Resource students already placed in
the mainstream for science, social studies, computer education, art, and physical
education were experiencing academic failure and displaying inappropriate
behaviors in these subject areas. The regular classroom teachers were
frustrated because there were few support services from the resource room
teacher and special education department. This problem was compounded by the
fact that the majority of the junior high teachers had little special education
coursework before graduating from college. Also, the district was not providing
teachers with any inservice training in the area of special education. As a
result, when students were either transitioned and/or mainstreamed into a
regular classroom the regular classroom teacher felt stranded.
To eliminate the difficulties the regular classroom teachers were having
and at the same time create an environment that would be academically and
behaviorally rewarding to LD students in transition and/or already in the
mainstream the writer developed and implemented a junior high transition
procedure involving 12 components designed to improve the transition process
J i
45
for LD students reentering the regular classroom from the resource room. The
solution to the problem was the implementation of a transition procedure that
was included in each LD student's IEP. The transition procedure included the
following 12 supportive components: (1) a written communication flowchart,
(2) a set of flowchart definitions explaining each step, (3) a list of
responsibilities for the regular classroom teacher and the resource room
teacher, (4) a competency-based assessment checklist, (5) a modified resource
room schedule, (6) a LD student profile, (7) a list of regular classroom
modifications, (8) a daily evaluation card, (9) a weekly evaluation card, (10) a
teacher inservice program, (1 1) a posttransition questionnaire, and (12) a list
of definitions for each of the 12 components.
The new transition procedure and the 12 related components were
implemented over a period of 12 weeks. During that time the writer was able to
identify improvements in the following areas: (a) the completion of in-class
assignments by LD students, (b) the transitioned/mainstreamed student's
overall achievement and output increased, (c) the regular classroom teacher's
feeling of abandonment was removed and replaced with compensation, and (d) the
regular classroom teacher is now less reluctant to receive a
transitioned/mainstreamed student.
Prior to the implementation of this practicum each junior high teacher
filled out a special education questionnaire (Appendix A) that had been developed
by the writer. The results from this questionnaire served as the baseline for the
46
practicum and inservice training. After analyzing the results from the special
education questionnaire, the writer established five outcomes for the practicum.
The first outcome focused on having each transitioned/mainstreamed student
complete 90% of their in-class assignments. The evaluation of this outcome
resulted in having each kinior high teacher review their gradebook for the
number of completed in-class and homework assignment during the first-
quarter grading period of the 1993-1994 school year. Their results are listed
on Table 2 in the "A" column. Following the third-quarter grading period and
after the implementation of this practicum the same teachers again reviewed
their gradebook for the number of in-class and homework assignments that were
completed. These results are reported on Table 2 in the "B" column. It should
be pointed out that the increase in the number of assignments for science, social
studies, computer education, art, and physical education, was a result of all
junior high resource students being mainstreamed for those academic areas.
The data listed in Table 2 shows that before this practicum the students in
math completed 28% of the required in-class assignments and 16% of the
homework assignments. No results are listed for the third-quarter because the
students reentered the resource room for math. In reading, before
:mplementation, 22% of the in-class assignments were completed and 10% of
the homework assignments. Following implementation, 88% of the in-class
assignments were completed and 80% of the homework assignments. In language,
5 G
47
Table 2
Comparison of junior high transitioned/mainstreamed students completing/notcompleting in-class and homework assignments for the first nine-week gradingperiod of the 1993-1994 school year.
Subject Areas Responding = 8
#of Student RecordsSubject Area
A B
In-Class Assignments/Homework AssignmentsYes No Yes No
A B A B A B A B
Math 1 0 10 -- 25 -- 4 -- 21
Reading 1 1 5 21 18 3 2 16 18 4
Language 1 1 3 19 20 2 2 15 18 1
Science 10 10 42 150 120 9 54 120 134 2
Social Studies 10 10 50 170 198 7 49 160 112 13
Computer Education 10 10 140 150 100 12
Art 10 10 35 62 50 7
Physical Education 10 10
before implementation, 13% of the in-class assignments were completed and
10% of the homework assignments. Following implementation, 90% of the in-
class assignments were completed and 94% of the homework assignments. In
science, before implementation, 26% of the in-class assignments were
completed and 29% of the homework assignments. Following implementation
94% of the in-class assignments were completed and 98% of the homework
assignments. In social studies, before implementation, 34% of the in-class
assignments were completed and 30% of the homework assignments. Following
48
implementation, 96% of the in-class were completed and 92% of the homework
assignments. In computer education, before implementation, 58% of the i n
class assignments were completed. Following implementation 92% of the in-
class assignments were completed. In art, before implementation, 41% of the in
class assignments were completed. Following implementation 92% of the in-
class assignments were completed. This data clearly demonstrated the
transitioned/mainstreamed students met the 90% completion goal in all areas
except reading. In reading only one student was mainstreamed and that student
completed 21 of the required 24 in-class assignments resulting in a 88%
completion rate.
The second outcome for this practicum was to have each transitioned and/or
mainstreamed student earn a passing grade in each subject. Table 3 shows a
comparison of the number of midterm failing notices for all the
transitioned/mainstreamed students that regular classroom teachers filed for the
first, second, and third quarters of the 1993-1994 school year. Results listed
in the third-quarter column followed the practicum study.
The third outcome focused on improving the regular classroom teacher's
understanding of each transitioned/mainstreamed student's academic and
behavioral characteristics, the fourth outcome focused on informing each
receiving teacher of the academic and behavioral needs of the transitioned and/or
mainstreamed student, arid the fifth outcome focused on informing the receiving
teacher of the criteria used for special education placement of each transitioned
Table 3
Comparison of total number of midterm failing notices submitted for highjunior transitioned/mainstreamed students the first, second, and thirdquarter of the 1993-1994 school year.
Total Number of Transitioned/Mainstreamed Students = 11
Grade level 1st Quarter 2nd Quarter 3rd Quarter
Seventh Grade Students 20 18 0
Eighth Grade Students 11 12 0
and/or mainstreamed student before they reentered their classroom. Following
the third-quarter grading period and near the end of the practicum
implementation period the writer surveyed each junior high teacher using the
posttransition questionnaire (Appendix B) to establish whether the third,
fourth, and fifth outcome had been met. The results listed in Table 4 clearly
demonstrate that the third, fourth, and fifth outcomes were accomplished.
A special education questionnaire was administered to establish a baseline
for teacher knowledge. The prequestionnaire had four objectives for the regular
classroom teachers and served as the baseline for: (1) teacher knowledge and
understanding of learning disabled students, (2) teacher knowledge and
understanding of the district's special education program, (3) teacher knowledge
and understanding of a learning disabled student's learning deficits, and (4)
teacher knowledge and understanding of Federal legislation for special education.
50
Table 4
Results from the posttransition questionnaire for regular classroom teachers.
Total Number of Teachers = 8 Teacher Response
Survey Question
1. Are you part of the multidisciplinary team and thedecision-making process that developed the leastrestrictive environment for the transition student?
2. Were you informed of the initial criteria andqualification data that placed the transitionedstudents in special education?
3. Were you informed of the criteria used thatqualified the student for transition?
4. Were you made aware of the transition student'sspecial academic requirements before having thestudent placed in your classroom?
5. Were you made aware of the transition student'sspecial behavior requirements before having thestudent placed in your classroom?
6. Do you have a complete copy of the transitionprocedures for improving the transition processfor learning disabled students reentering the regularclassroom?
7. Have you received necessary follow-up with yourtransitioned student/s and/or mainstream student/sin you classroom?
8. Are the transitioned/mainstreamed students in yourClassroom bringing their "Daily" or "Weekly"evaluation as outlined in the transition procedures?
9. Are you receiving "A Special 'IEP' Invitation"when resource students are scheduled for amultidisciplinary conference?
10. Do you receive follow-up contact from the feedbackform within the stated in the transition procedures?
11. Do you need additional support services regardingthe resource students in your classroom?
Yes No
8 0
8 0
8 0
8 0
8 0
8 0
8 0
8 0
8 0
8 0
2 5
The first question on the questionnaire asked the regular classroom teachers
where they felt most special education students were best served. The options
teachers had to choose from included: (a) regular classroom with their peers,
BEST COPY AVAILABLE
GJ
51
(b) self-contained special education classroom (all academic classes held in the
same room), (c) resource room model (students attending special education
classes for deficit areas only), and (d) other. Results from the pre /
postquestionnaire for question one can be seen in Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Results of Respondent's Choices on Question Number One.
Question #1: In you opinion, where do you feel most special education studentsare best served?
Number of Teachers Responding = 8
ea
her
R
e
p0nd
n
g
Sp. Ed. Questionnaire: Question #1
Choice A Choice B Choice C Choice D
Choice of Least Restrictive EnvironmentPrequestionnaire Postquestionnaire
Prequestionnaire responses were mixed among the four choices with half of
teachers selecting the district's currently used resource room model.
Postquestionnaire results following the practicum and teacher inservice training
61
52
showed two out of eight teachers favor the self-contained classroom (Choice A)
and the other six teachers favor the resource room model (Choice C) the district
is currently using. The change in results reflects a positive chang'e in teacher
attitudes towards LD student and supports the least restrictive environment
concept.
For questions 2 through 25 teachers were asked to rate themselves on a
scale of one-to-five. A one response represents a "Low" rating and a five
response represents a "High" rating. The average pre /postquestionnaire
responses for questions 2 through 25 are listed in Figure 2 . One of the most
important outcome from this practicum study can be seen in Figure 2, question
number two, where junior high teachers were asked about their preference
towards having learning disabled students in their classroom. The average
postquestionnaire response increased by 1.1 points. This increase indicated that
seven out of eight teachers rated themselves at the midpoint range or above as
preference for having learning disabled students in their regular classroom.
Improving the regular classroom teacher's overall understanding of the district's
special education program was another important ingredient for this practicum
study. In Figure 2, question number three, teachers were asked about their
overall understanding of the district's special education program. The average
postquestionnaire response increased by 0.5 which indicated that three out of
eight teachers felt they had a "High" understanding of the special education
program, four teachers above-average and one teacher selected the midpoint
6
53
Figure 2
Results of the Pre and Postspecial Education Questionnaire for Questions 2through 25.
Number of Teachers Responding = 8
A5.0
4.5
a 4.0.
Pre/Post Sp. Ed. Questionnaire Results
e 3.5.'... .:...
T 3.0 ...' ....
*.!.e2.5 ...
.'! ...' ....
2.0 : .-... :_.h ---- ::
...... ...... .... .
... ....
- '''.-....r -...
1.0-- .. :..';.R '
'.1.e 0.5 , ;.;
s0.011: ::.
.. ......
P1- rt 1 1 1 1 t 1* I i T I i* I f t t E.
r-
"7
0n
e
Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Q8 Q9 Q1 Q13 Q15 Q17 Q19
Rating: 1=Low/5=High
IDPrequestionnaire 0 Postquestionnaire
.
TififQ21 Q23 Q25
range. This question's results did not change dramatically but it is an indicator
that the school district is headed in the right direction.
An issue receiving much attention today in the educational planning process
as well as in litigation decisions deals with the "least restrictive environment."
In Figure 2, question number four, teachers were ask about their understanding
of the term Least Restrictive Environment. The average postquestionnaire
response increased by 0.6. This increase indicated that all eight teachers
reported an above-average understanding of least restrictive environment.
6.3
54
Within the writer's school setting a major misunderstanding focused
around the school district's "No Pass No Play" policy. In Figure 2, question
number five, teacher's were asked about their understanding of the "No Pass No
Play" policy and how it relates to the special education student. The average
postquestionnaire response increased by 2.1 points. This increase indicated that
six teachers were reported a high understanding of the "No Pass No Play" policy
and two teachers had an above average understanding.
As discussed in Chapter IV, there is a need for additional undergraduate
training for regular classroom teachers in the area of special education. For
teachers already in the teaching field there is a need for continuous inservice
training. In Figure 2, question number six, teachers were asked about their
special education training, experience, or education. The average
postquestionnaire response increased by 0.9. This increase indicated that six out
of eight teachers felt comfortable responding at the midpoint range or higher as
to the amount of special education training they had. This increase in
understanding special education by the regular classroom teacher has had a
significant affect on the transitioned/mainstreamed students through improved
instruction, classroom modifications, and using adjusted grading techniques.
In Figure 2, question number seven, junior high teachers were asked about
their understanding of the unique academic and social needs of the learning
disabled students. The average postquestionnaire response increased by 1.7
points. This increase indicated that all eight junior high teachers responded at
64
55
the midpoint range or higher. This increase in understanding is attributed to
teacher inservice training and increased communication between the regular
classroom teacher and resource room teacher.
Improving the regular classroom teacher's understanding of the referral
process for special education was another important area addressed in this
practicum. In Figure 2, question number eight, teachers were asked about their
understanding of the procedures involved in referring a student for special
education evaluation. The average postquestionnaire response increased by 1.2
points. This increase indicated that all eight junior high teachers responded at
the midpoint range or higher. This increase in understanding in the referral
process is important because regular classroom teachers are now more likely to
exhaust regular classroom alternatives before referring a low functioning
student to the lengthy process of special evaluation referral.
A highly discussed and confusing concept among junior high teachers is the
way some low functioning students qualify for special education and others do not.
In Figure 2, question number nine, teachers were asked about their
understanding of the criteria for placing learning disabled students in special
education. The average postquestionnaire response increased by 1.2 points. This
increase indicated that all eight junior high teacher responded at the midpoint
range or higher when asked about their understanding of the criteria used for
placing learning disabled students in special education.
Increasing the regular classroom teacher's understanding of the
65
56
psychoeducational evaluation process for special education eligibility and
placement was another concern. In Figure 2, question number 10, teachers were
asked about their understanding of the psychoeducational evaluation process for
special education eligibility and placement. The average postquestionnaire
response increased by 2.7 points which indicated that all eight junior high
teachers responded at the midpoint range or higher. This increase in
understanding can be attributed to teacher inservice training and greater
involvement by the regular classroom in the special education process.
Another important item that needed addressing dealt with improving the
junior hinh teacher's understanding of the definition for learning disabilities.
Figure 2, question number 1 1, teachers were asked about their understanding of
the definition for learning disabilities. The average postquestionnaire response
increased by 1.6 points. This increase indicated that three teachers had an above
average understanding and the remaining five teachers had a "High"
understanding of the definition of learning disabilities.
All junior high teachers are requested to serve on the Teacher Assistant
Team (TAT) and the Multidisciplinary Team (MDT). However, before this
practicum study most of the junior high teachers were unsure of the TAT's role
concerning the special education student. In Figure 2, question number 1 2,
teachers were asked about their understanding of the district's Teacher Assistant
Team and its objectives. The average postquestionnaire response increased by
2.0 points. This increase indicated that all eight junior high teachers responded
6
57
at the midpoint range or higher. This increase shows that junior high teachers
had a greater understanding of the TAT and its goals and objectives. In Figure 2,
question number 1 2, teachers were asked about their understanding of the MDT.
The average postquestionnaire resPonse increased by 1.5 points. This increase
indicated that seven out of eight teachers responded at the midpoint range or
higher. This increase in understanding for the TAT and the MDT was attributed,
in part, to better communication and having the regular classroom teacher take a
more active role in the decision-making process for LD students.
Increasing teacher awareness of the different types of learning disability
was a primary emphasis for the teacher inservice training. During teacher
inservice training each teacher was presented information in the areas of visual
perceptual/visual motor deficits, auditory perceptual deficits, spatial
relationships and body awareness deficits, motor output deficits, attention
deficits disorder, failure syndrome, and serious emotional disability. In Figure
2, questions 14 through 22, represents the average teacher response to each
question. Question 14 asked teachers about their understanding of visual
perceptual and visual motor deficits. The average postquestionnaire response
increased by 1.3 points. This increase indicated that seven out of eight teachers
responded at the midpoint range or higher. Question 15 asked teachers about
their understanding of auditory perceptual deficits. The average
postquestionnaire response increased by 1.0. This increase indicated that seven
out of eight teachers responded at the midpoint range or higher. Question 16
6!
58
asked teachers about their understanding of spatial relationships and body
awareness deficits. The average postquestionnaire response increased by 1.1
points. This increase indicated that seven out of eight teachers responded at the
midpoint range or higher. Question 17 asked teachers about their understanding
of conceptual deficits. The average postquestionnaire response increased 0.9.
This increase indicated that all eight teachers responded at the midpoint range or
higher. Question 18 asked teachers about their understanding of memory
deficits. The average postquestionnaire response increased by 1.1 points. This
increase indicated that all eight teachers responded at the midpoint range or
higher. Question 19 asked teachers about their understanding of motor output
deficits. The average postquestionnaire response increased by 1.1 points. This
increase indicated that all eight teachers responded to the midpoint range or
higher. Question 20 asked teachers about their understanding of attention deficit
disorder. The average postquestionnaire response increased by 0.9. This
increase indicated that all eight teachers responded at the midpoint range or
higher. Question 21 asked teachers about their understanding of the failure
syndrome. The average postquestionnaire response increased by 1.9 points. This
increase indicated that seven out of eight teachers responded to the midpoint
range or higher. Question 22 asked teachers about their understanding of serious
emotional disability. The average postquestionnaire response was 1.3 points.
This increase indicated that seven out of eight teachers responded at the midpoint
range or higher.
59
Postquestionnaire results for questions 14 through 22 show a significant
increase in teacher awareness of the different types of learning disability and
improved knowledge of a learning disabled student's deficits. Teachers are now
able to apply their new knowledge towards special programming, materials,
instructional modifications, and the actual difficulties and/or struggles LD
students go through when confronted with ways to learn new concepts.
Questions 23 through 25 surveyed teachers as to their knowledge of Federal
legislation in special education. In Figure 2, question number 23, teachers were
asked about their understanding of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, PL 94-142,
Section 504. The average postquestionnaire response increased by 2.2 points.
This increase indicated that seven out of eight teachers responded at the midpoint
range or higher. In Figure 2, question number 24, teachers were asked about
their understanding of the Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975,
PL. 94-142. The average postquestionnaire response increased by 2.1 points.
This increase indicated that all eight teachers responded at the midpoint range or
higher. In Figure 2, question number 25, teachers were asked about their
understanding of the Education of the Handicapped Act Amendment of 1990
(IDEA). The average postquestionnaire response increased by 2.0 points. This
increase indicated that seven out of eight teachers responded at the midpoint
range or higher. There is significant improvement in how teachers rated
themselves between the pre /postquestionnaire on all survey questions. This is a
positive outcome from the practicum experience and an indicator that it was a
63
60
success. The writer plans to keep working cooperatively with the administration
to increase better communication and provide inservice training for the
district's regular classroom teachers.
Discussion
The process of developing transition procedures, providing inservice
training for teachers, and holding transition students more accountable for their
academics and behavior has had three significant results on the junior high
special education program. The first result was the increased in communication
between the regular classroom teacher and the resource room teacher. Regular
classroom teachers now feel they have a definitive procedure to follow,
established guidelines for support services, and ongoing student evaluation when
students are transitioned into their classroom. The teacher's communication
flowchart (Appendix D) and definition (Appendix E) explained each step and
cleared up the otherwise wait-to-see method of evaluation and communication
that was used before the practicum. Regular classroom teachers now take the
every third week written communication procedures more seriously and go out of
their way to document each student's current achievement, behavioral
performance, and new teacher needs and/or intervention. The immediate follow-
up on requests for needed intervention also proved successful. Immediate
intervention resulted in fewer failing notices, fewer incomplete assignments,
and fewer review of placement. The transitioned/mainstreamed students have
1 0
61
started showing more accountability for their education and behavior with the
use of the "Daily Evaluation Card" (Appendix K) and the "Weekly Evaluation
Card"(Appendix L).
The second positive result was the increase in regular classroom teachers'
understanding of the district's special education program, learning disabilities,
and Federal legislation supporting special education. The regular classroom
teachers are now demonstrating that they understand the district's special
education program in greater detail. The increased knowledge and understanding
were apparent when the regular classroom teachers communicated with the
writer during student staffings and at the teachers' monthly faculty meeting.
Regular classroom teachers have begun communicating more openly about
learning disabilities. The regular classroom teachers have started using
available resources from the resource room before they automatically fill out a
TAT request or request from the special education department that a student's
least restrictive environment needs to be reviewed.
The regular classroom teachers now have a better understanding of the
definition for learning disabilities and recognize that slow learners are not
necessarily learning disabled. Teachers are demonstrating they have increased
knowledge regarding the disabled student by applying additional resources,
adapting the student's learning environment, adjusting teaching style, and
adapting regular classroom materials to fit the student's academic needs. Using
alternative approaches for student failure has replaced immediate student
71
62
referral. This change in philosophy has strengthened the overall special
education program and improved the LD students' achievement.
Improved student accountability is the third positive result from this
practicum study. Improved student accountability is evident by fewer students
having to use the "Daily Evaluation Card," fewer incomplete regular
assignments, fewer failing notices, and fewer complaints from regular classroom
teachers regarding the transitioned/mainstreamed student's classroom
performance. The resource room teacher has noticed an increase in regular
classroom teacher's requests for assistance in the regular classroom, suggestions
for adapting materials, suggestions for using adjusted grading, and support with
transitioned/mainstreamed students taking exams under the supervision of the
resource room teacher.
Individually, the transition procedures, teacher inservice training, and
holding the transition student more accountable for their academics and behavior
would not have much of an affect towards improving the transition process for
learning disabled students reentering the regular classroom. However, by
combining all of these solutions into a synchronized transition procedure they
have had a dramatic and positive affect on the district's junior high special
education program.
Recommendations
The writer has five recommendations that would support and strengthen the
63
results outlined in this study:
1. Teacher inservice training for special education should be broadened to
include all district teachers and be held at least once a year.
2. The school district should consider adapting and/or implementing
similar transition procedures for all grade levels along with placing
more emphasis on the district's special education program, processes,
and formal procedures.
3. The school district should encourage and/or put into district, policy that
regular classroom teachers be required to have a minimum of six
postgraduate hours in special education.
4. The school district should encourage regular classroom teachers to
attend local and state workshops in the area of special education.
5. The school district should sponsor inservice training for teachers by
bringing in outside professionals in the field of special education and/or
related services.
Dissemination
The results of this practicum study will be disseminated locally to the
district superintendent and the governing school board, to the school
administration and special education department, and to the faculty at a regular
monthly meeting. On the county level, the writer will forward a copy of the
practicum results to the county superintendent's office where they can be
64
distributed county-wide to interested school districts. On the state level the
writer will use the practicum results when applying to call-for-papers for
statewide organizations that sponsor workshops and conventions on special
education. On the national level, the writer plans to contact the special education
department at the writer's alm- mater and offer to be a guest lecturer during a
summer school session. Finally, the writer plans to submit a summary of this
practicum study to academic journals in the field of elementary education,
learning disabilities, and special education.
7 .1
65
References
Ariel, A. (1992). Education of children and adolescents with learningdisabilities. New York: Macmillan Publishing Company.
Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975, § 300.550(b), 34 C. F.
R. § 1412(5)(B).
George, N. L., & Lewis, T. J. (1991). Exit assistance for special educator-helping students make the transition. Teaching Exceptional Children23(2), 34 39.
Grcsenick, J. K., George, N. L., & George, M. P. (1988). The availability ofprogram descriptions among programs for seriously emotionally disturbedstudents. Behavioral Disorders, 13, 108-115.
Harwell, J. M. (1989). Complete learning disabilities handbook. New York:Center for Applied Research in Education.
Horne, R. L. (1991). The education of children and youth with special needs:What do the laws say?. NICHCY, 1(1), 1-16.
Hundert, J. (1982). Some considerations of planning the integration ofhandicapped children into the mainstream. Journal of LearningDisabilities, 15(2), 73-80.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1980). Integrating handicapped students intothe mainstream. Exceptional Children 47(2), 90-98.
Meier, F. E. (1992). Competency-based instruction for teachers of studentswith special learning needs. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Rehabilitation Act of 1973, § 504, 29 U. S. C. § 794(a).
Rothstein, L. F. (1990). Special education law. New York: White Plains.
Salend, S. J. (1990), Effective mainstreaming. New York: MacmillanPublishing
Salend, S. J. (1984). Factors contributing to the development of successfulmainstreaming programs. Exceptional Children, 50(5), 409-416.
66
Salend, S. J., Brooks, L., & Sa lend, S. (1987). Identifying school districts'policies for implementing mainstreaming. The Point 32, 34-37.
Salend, S. J., & Johns, J. (1983). A tale of two teachers: Changing teachercommitment to mainstream. Teaching Exceptional Children, 1 5(2), 82-85.
Sa lend, S. J., & Lutz, J. G. (1984). Mainstreaming or mainlining: A competencybased approach to mainstreaming. Journal of Learning Disabilities,17(1), 27-29.
Schultz, J. B., Carpenter, C. D., & Turnbull, A. P. (1991). Mainstreamingexceptional students: A guide for classroom teachers. Boston, MA: Allyn &Bacon.
Stainback, W., Stainback, S., Courtnage, L., & Jaben, T. (1985). Facilitatingmainstreaming by modifying the mainstream. Exceptional Children, 52,34-37.
Stephens, T. M. & Braun, B. L. (1980). Measures of regular classroom teachers'attitudes toward handicapped children. Exceptional Children, 46(4), 292-294.
Tymitz-Wolf, B. L. (1982). Extending the scope of inservice training formainstreaming effectiveness. Teacher Education and Special Education,5(2),17-23.
Vasa, S. F. (1981). Alternative procedures for grading handicapped students inthe secondary schools. Education Unlimited, 3(1), 1 6 -23.
Wood, J. W. (1989). Mainstreaming. Columbus: Merrill Publishing.
APPENDIX A
SPECIAL EDUCATION QUESTIONNAIRE
7
68
Special Education Questionnaire
I. General Information
1) In your opinion, where do you feel most special education students are bestserved: (Circle A, B, C. or D)
Low/High1 5
Circle One2) 1 2 3 4 5
A = Regular classroom with their peers
B = Self-contained special education classroom (all academicclasses held in the same room).
C = Resource room model (students attending specialeducation classes for deficit areas only).
D = Other (explain)
Your preference towards having learning disabled students inyour classroom.
3) 1 2 3 4 5 Your overall understanding of the districts special education'program.
4) 1 2 3 4 5 Your understanding of Least Restrictive Environment.
5) 1 2 3 4 5 Your understanding of the "No Pass No Play" policy and the specialeducation student.
6) 1 2 3 4 5 The amount of special education training, experience or educationyou presently have.
7) 1 2 3 4 5 Your understanding of the unique academic and social needs of thelearning disabled students.
8) 1 2 3 4 5 Your understanding of the procedures involved in referring astudent for special education evaluation.
9) 1 2 3 4 5 Your understanding of the criteria for placing learning disabledstudents into special education.
10) 1 2 3 4 5 Your understanding of the psychoeducational evaluation process fora special education eligibility and placement.
11) 1 2 3 4 5 Your understanding of the definition for learning disabilities.
69
Low/High1 5
Circle one
Special Education Questionnaire continued
1 2) 1 2 3 4 5 Your understanding of the district's Teacher Assistant Team(TAT) and its objective/s.
13) 1 2 3 4 5 Your understanding of a learning disabled student'smultidisciplinary team.
14) 1 2 3 4 5 Your understanding of visual perceptual or visual motor deficits.
1 5) 1 2 3 4 5 Your understanding of auditory perceptual deficits.
1 6 ) 1 2 3 4 5 Your understanding of spatial relationships and body awarenessdeficits.
1 7) 1 2 3 4 5 Your understanding of conceptual deficits.
18) 1 2 3 4 5 Your understanding of memory deficits.
19) 1 2 3 4 5 Your understanding of motor output deficits
II. Behavioral Components
20) 1 2 3 4 5 Your understanding of attention deficit disorder.
21) 1 2 3 4 5 Your understanding of failure syndrome.
22) 1 2 3 4 5 Your understanding of serious emotional disability.
Ill. Federal Legislation
23) 1 2 3 4 5 Your understanding of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, PL. 93-112,Section 504.
24) 1 2 3 4 5 Your understanding of the Education for All Handicapped ChildrenAct (EHA) of 1975, PL. 94-142.
25) 1 2 3 4 5 Your understanding of the Education of the Handicapped ActAmendment of 1990 (IDEA), PL. 101-476.
73
APPENDIX B
POSTTRANSITION QUESTIONNAIRE
U0
POSTTRANSITION AND SUPPORT SERVICES QUESTIONNAIREFOR
REGULAR CLASSROOM TEACHERS
Check OneYes No
T1
ri
nn
Comments:
Are you part of the multidisciplinary team and the decision-making process that developed the least restrictiveenvironment for the transition student?
Were you informed of the initial criteria end qualification datathat placed the transitioned students in special education?
Were you informed of the criteria used that qualified thestudent for transition?
Were you made aware of the transition student's specialacademic requirements before having the student placed inyour classroom?
Were you made aware of the transition student's specialbehavior requirements before having the student placed inyour classroom?
Do you have a complete copy of the transition procedures forimproving the transition process for learning disabledstudents ring the regular classroom?
Have you received necessary follow-up with your transitionedstudent/s and/or mainstream student/s in you classroom?
Are the transitioned/mainstreamed students in your classroombringing their "Daily" or "Weekly" evaluation as outlined inthe transition procedures?
Are you receiving "A Special 'IEP' Invitation" when resourcestudents are scheduled for a multidisciplinary conference?
Do you receive follow-up contact from the feedback form within thetime stated in the transition procedures?
Do you need additional support services regarding the resourcestudents in your classroom? If yes, describe what you need below.
31
APPENDIX C
TRANSITION PROCEDURE
73
TRANSITION PROCEDURES FOR JUNIOR HIGH LEARNING DISABLEDSTUDENTS REENTERING THE REGULAR CLASSROOM
The following procedures will be part of each learning disabled (LD)
student's individualized educational program (IEP) at the junior high school
level. These procedures will assist in providing the student's multidisciplinary
team with an appropriate criterion for determining the student's least
restrictive environment (LRE). The competency-based assessment, one part of
these procedures, can also be used at the annual IEP review to serve as the
standard for validating the student's progress and a reminder of the competencies
needed to transition out of the special education program.
1. The student's readiness will be assessed using a competency-basedassessment.
2. The student will follow a modified resource room schedule the fourweeks before transitioning.
3. The regular classroom teacher will receive a Student Profile regardingthe academic and behavioral characteristics for each student intransition.
4. Each regular classroom teacher receiving a student through thetransition process will be provided the following items:
The student's competency-based assessment.The student's academic and behavioral characteristics.Strategies for possible academic and environment modifications tothe regular classroom.Scheduled communication procedures.A communication flowchart.Additional support services as required by the student/teacher.Additional support services will be assessed on individualtransitioning/mainstreaming placement.
8 3
APPENDIX D
FLOWCHART
8 4
FLOWCHART
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS FOR TRANSITIONED/MAINSTREAMED STUDENTS
Junior High TeacherMonitors
Transitioned/Mainstreamedstudents
Regular ClassroomTeacher
Principal/Director'sReview/Comments
Junior HighResource Room Teacher
Special Area Teacher/s
Feedback CopiesStudent files
No
Regular TeacherRequests Information
Regular TeacherRequested Meeting
ScheduleMeeting
Change in IEPNeed
Parent Conference
Intervention/Strategiesfrom
Resource Teacher
SuccessfulIntervention/Strategies
Yes Yes
Parent ConferenceAddendum
No
Yes
ContinueInterventions/strategies
APPENDIX E
FLOWCHART DEFINITIONS
86
77
FLOWCHART DEFINITIONS
JUNIOR HIGH RESOURCE TEACHER: The resource teacher starts the writtencommunication cycle every third Thursday by placing a feedback form/s in the regularclassroom teacher's mailbox.REGULAR CLASSROOM TEACHER: The regular classroom teacher fills out the feedbackform with information pertaining to the student's academic performance, behavioralperformance, current grade, and whether the grade has been adjusted or not. Regularclassroom teachers are to returned the completed feedback forms to theprincipal by 8:00 a.m. the following Tuesday after receiving them.ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW/COMMENTS: The administrative personnel reviews allfeedback forms and makes comments related to possible intervention strategies for theresource teacher to pursue.JUNIOR HIGH RESOURCE TEACHER & SPECIAL AREA TEACHER/S: After theresource room teacher receives the feedback forms from the principal they are reviewed forneeded intervention. If all academic and behavioral information is positive and the "NO" iscircled regarding" no need for a meeting" the three week cycle repeats. However, if a regularclassroom teacher has made note of the need for intervention/assistance the resource roomteacher responds within two school days.Also, if any students are receiving support services from other school/district personnel acopy of the feedback form is forwarded to them for review and recordkeeping. After supportpersonnel review the feedback form they may also request intervention/assistance from theresource room teacher.FEEDBACK COPIES: Following administrative review of the feedback forms two copies aremade for distribution. One copy is sent to the Director of Special Education and the other copyis sent to the special education office for placement in each student's special education file. Atthis step, the Special Education Director and/or school psychologist may also request additionalinformation or data from the resource room teacher regarding a student's problem area/s.REGULAR TEACHER REQUESTED INFORMATION: The resource teacher will answerand/or provide information within two days following a request.REGULAR TEACHER REQUESTS A MEETING: The regular classroom teacher can requesta meeting with the resource teacher by circling the "YES" on the feedback form and stating thebest time to meet.SCHEDULE MEETING: The resource teacher will schedule a meeting within two school days.INTERVENTION/STRATEGIES FROM RESOURCE TEACHER: The resource teacher willprovide intervention/assistance within two school days following a request.CHANGE IN IEP - NEED PARENT CONFERENCE: The multidisciplinary team decideswhether or not the resource teacher's proposed intervention strategy constitutes a majorchange in the student's current IEP. If yes, the parents need tk, be involved.SUCCESSFUL INTERVENTION/STRATEGIES: If the information, material, and/orintervention strategies provided by the resource room teacher are successful the three weekwritten communication cycle repeats. If intervention/strategies are not successful theresource teacher provides additional intervention/strategies within two school days.PARENT CONFERENCE - ADDENDUM: A meeting involving the student's multidisciplinaryteam, parents/guardian, and special area/s teacher is scheduled to add an addendum to thestudent's current IEP. The addendum list all new, agreed upon, modifications to the student'scurrent IEP.CONTINUE INTERVENTION /STRATEGIES: Suggested intervention/strategies are initiatedand the three week written communication cycle repeats.
8 7
APPENDIX F
TEACHER RESPONSIBILITIES
79
TEACHER RESPONSIBILITIES DURING THE TRANSITION/MAINSTREAM PROCESS
RESOURCE ROOM TEACHER'S RESPONSIBILITIES
The resource room teacher shall be available to regular classroom teachers forassistance with special education students.
The resource room teacher can assist regular classroom teachers indeveloping appropriate classroom work for transition students.
The resource room teacher can assist regular classroom teachers indeveloping appropriate grading criteria for transition students.
The resource room teacher will receive feedback from the regular classroomteacher on each transition student on a three week rotation schedule.
The resource room teacher will respond to any academic/behavioral request(either as a result of the Feedback Form) or as a result of needed interventionwithin a period of two school days.
The resource room teacher shall be available to assist regular classroom teachersin determining transitioned student's mid -term; quarterly, semester, and finalgrades.
The resource room teacher will be an active participant at all Teacher AssistantTeam (TAT) meetings.
The resource room teacher shall be available to provide inservice training forregular classroom teachers and regular classroom students.
The resource room teacher shall be available to assist regular classroomteachers during test taking for transition students (e.g., in the regular classroomor in the resource room).
The resource room teacher shall be available to assist regular classroom teachersduring parent teacher conferences (if requested).
REGULAR CLASSROOM TEACHER'S RESPONSIBILITIES
The regular classroom teacher will be an active member of the Teacher AssistantTeam (TAT).
The regular classroom teacher should provide each learning disabled (LD)student with an academic environment commensurate with their ability.
The regular classroom teacher should provide each LD student with a modifiedcurriculum commensurate with his/her academic ability.
83
80
REGULAR CLASSROOM TEACHER'S RESPONSIBILITIES continued
The regular classroom teacher should provide each LD student with anindividualized grading criterion. This grading criterion should be reflective ofthe student's academic ability and listed in the student's current individualizededucational plan (IEP).
The regular classroom teacher should provide each LD student with the sameacademic/social opportunities as their nondisabled peers in a way that iscommensurate with their ability.
The regular classroom teacher should provide the resource room teacher withon-going communication as to the status of each LD student's progress. Thiscommunication can be as often as daily but not longer than a three week rotation.
J0
APPENDIX G
COMPETENCY-RASED ASSESSMENT
91
Check oneYes Pb
Ti
82
COMPETENCY-BASED APPROACH TO TRANSITIONINGFOR
JUNIOR HIGH LD STUDENTS REENTERING THE REGULAR CLASSROOM
READINESS
R - 1 The student is able to get to class on time with all necessarymaterials and prepared to work.
R - 2 The student is able to pay attention during instructionalpresentations.
R - 3 The student is able to perform classroom work commensurate tohis/her ability.
R 4 The student is able to demonstrate an understanding of correctclassroom behavior (e.g., raising hand, staying in seat, and nottalking out of turn).
R - 5 The student is able to react positively to comments from teachersand peers.
BEHAVIOR
B - 1 The student is able to work cooperatively with other students.
B- 2 The student is able to follow regular classroom rules andregulations.
B - 3 The student is able to seek help from the teacher when unclear aboutwhat is required from an assignment.
INSTRUCTIONAL
I - 1 The student is able to manipulate any particular instructionalequipment in the classroom.
I - 2 The student is able to copy information off the chalkboard, from anoverhead screen, and charts.
I 3 The student is able to understand the language and terminology usedfor class instruction and discipline.
I - 4 The student is able to record assignments in a notebookaccurately and in an organized manner.
9
:11
Ch ecx one
Yes No
1
n1 1
Fl
83
COMPETENCY-BASED ASSESSMENT continued
ACADEMICS/ASSIGNMENTS
A-1 The student is able to read and write at a fifth grade level or above.
A-2 The student is able to do math calculations for addition, subtraction,multiplication, and division.
A-3 The student is able to write simple sentences with subject and verbagreement.
A-4 The student is able to write cursive/manuscript legibly.
A- 5 The student is able to make a simple book report.
A-6 The student is able to work independently.
A-7 The student is able to give oral presentations.
A-8 The student is able to use the library and its reference materialsadequately.
A-9 The student is able to use the dictionary adequately.
A-10 The student is able to complete homework assignmentscommensurate with ability and on time.
A-1 1 The student is able to participate in class discussion.
A-1 2 The student is able to take tests independently.
Additional academic/behavioral information:
If any of the above competencies are checked "No," list the steps that will be taken tocompensate for each negative area.
9 3
APPENDIX H
MODIFIED RESOURCE ROOM SCHEDULE
94
85
MODIFIED RESOURCE ROOM SCHEDULE
By modifying the resource room's environment to emulate that of the regular
classroom the learning disabled (LD) student will develop the prerequisite skills
needed to survive the transition process.
Four weeks before each LD student enters the transition process the following
modified resource room schedule will be implemented:
The student will be required to arrive to class on time with the necessarymaterials.
The student will start receiving assignments verbally and he/she will alsobe required to copy them from the chalkboard.
The student will start receiving instructional presentation from anoverhead screen.
The student will be required to work independently and for longer periodsof time.
The student will be required to seek teacher assistance when he/she isunclear about an assignment, task, or experiencing a problem in class.
The student will start using regular classroom textbook, materials, andworksheets.
The student will start receiving one homework assignment (for eachregular class/subject) the first week, two the second week, threethe third week, and four the fourth week. This procedure will shiftpersonal responsibility to the student and help prepare the student for therequirements of the regular classroom. All homework assignments will becommensurate with the student's academic ability.
The student will start assisting the resource room teacher when otherresource students need assistance with difficult academics.
APPENDIX I
STUDENT PROFILE
9 i)
87
JUNIOR HIGH STUDENT PROFILEFOR
LEARNING DISABLED STUDENTS REENTERING THE REGULAR CLASSROOM
Regular Classroom Teacher
Resource Room Teacher
Student Grade
Transition/Mainstream Date: Full Time Part Time
If Part time: Percentage of day in the MAINSTREAM:
Percentage of day in the RESOURCE ROOM:
THE FOLLOWING [CRITERIA] WAS USED IN DETERMINING THE READINESS
FOR TO TRANSITION INTO
Student's Name Regular Classroom Subject
STUDENT'S ACADEMIC CHARACTERISTICS
STUDENT'S BEHAVIORAL CHARACTERISTICS
9/
APPENDIX J
REGULAR CLASSROOM MODIFICATION
95
89
POSSIBLE REGULAR CLASSROOM MODIFICATIONS
ACCOMMODATE LEARNING DISABLED
I . CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT
Arrange chairs and tables so learning disabled (LD) students do not go unnoticed.
Use workstations and learning centers.Seat LD students close to the teacher.
Have LD students follow an established daily routine.
Record Daily/Weekly assignments on the chalkboard.Provide peer-tutoring for LD students when necessary.Assign LD students to a daily classroom chore.
I I . TEACHING APPROACH
Use video recorders to tape instructional presentations for students to reviewlater. Nondisabled students can also use the video tapes for review.
Use concrete examples in presentations.
Use visual aids and hands-on activities/examples.
Present instructional information to match student's learning styles.Be consistent in reviewing material and concepts.
Highlight important facts for recalling later.Present instructional lessons in small units.Provide students with a written summary of verbal presentations.
III. STUDENT INSTRUCTION/MATERIALS
Present written material in student terms/vocabulary.Limit the number of items and questions on worksheets.
Use sequencing to build on already learned concepts.
Allow student to use learning aids (e.g., calculators, fact sheets, vocabulary
definitions, notes).Ask questions in the same order they are found in the text.
List pages where questions are located.
1 each students to use the book's Table of Contents, Index, and Glossary for
information.
IV. LEARNING STRATEGIES
Encourage students to keep a daily journal.
Enable the students to use oral presentations.
Allow students to present assignments using a variety of methods (e.g., special
projects, pictures, designs, models, drawings).
90
MODIFICATIONS cortinued
IV. LEARNING STRATEGIES continued
Allow the students to use technology if available.
Provide the students with reading materials on cassette.
V. CLASSROOM MANAGEMENT
Use student contracts for academics and behavior.
Use an established classroom routine.
List your academic and behavioral expectations somewhere in the classroom.Provide students with a chance to earn "choice time."
Provide immediate feedback for positive responses and behavior.
VI. TEST CONSTRUCTION AND ADMINISTRATION
Allow students more time when taking exams and completing assignments.
Test what is taught.
State directior s in clear and simple terms.Provide student examples.
Allow students to write on test booklets or worksheets.Use short exams.
Read the directions to the students.
Construct individual tests in only one style (e.g., multiple choice, true or false,fill-in-the-blank, etc.).Color code areas and items of importance.
1110
APPENDIX K
DAILY EVALUATION CARD
101
DAILY EVALUATION CARD
Name Subject
Date
Period
Current Grade Grade Level
92
Regular Classroom Teacher
Resource Room Teacher: Parent Signature/Date
ARRIVES TO CLASS ON TIME
BRINGS MATERIALS
HOMEWORK COMPLETED
IN-CLASS ASSIGNMENT/S
ATTITUDE
BEHAVIOR
GROUP WORK
CIRCLE ALL THAT APPLY AND INITIAL AT RIGHTHIGH LOW
10[ ]9[ ]8[ ]71 16[ ]5[ ]4[ ]3[ ]2[ ]1[ [0[
10[ ]9[ ]8[ ]7[ ]6[ ]5[ ]4[ ]3[ [2[ ]1[ ]0[ ]
10[ ]9[ ]8[ ]7[ ]6[ ]51 ]4[ ]3[ ]2[ ]1[ ]0[
10[ ]9[ ]8[ ]7[ ]6[ ] 5[ ]4[ ]3[ ]2[ ]1[ ]0[
10[ ]9[ ]8[ ]7[ ]6[ ]5[ ]4[ ]3[ ]2[ ]1[ ]0[ ]
10[ ]9[ ]8[ ]7[ ]6[ j5[ ]4[ ]3[ ]2[ ]1[ ]0[ ]
10[ ]9[ ]8[ ]7[ ]6[ ]5[ ]4[ ]3[ ]2[ ]1[ ]0[ ]
THIS FORM IS SENT HOME TO THE PARENTS EACH WEEK FOR THEM TO REVIEW, SIGN, ANDRETURN. COMMENTS:
.1.0'2
APPENDIX L
WEEKLY EVALUATION CARD
103
WEEKLY EVALUATION CARD
Name Subject
Date Current Grade
Regular Classroom Teacher
Resource Room Teacher:
Period
Grade Level
94
Parent Signature/Date
ARRIVES TO CLASS ON TINT
BRINGS MATERIALS
HOMEWORK COMPLETED
IN-CLASS ASSIGNMENT/S
ATTITUDE
BEHAVIOR
GROUP WORK
CIRCLE ALL THAT APPLY AND INITIAL AT RIGHTHIGH t LOW
10(
101
10[
10(
10[
101
101
191
191
191
191
19[
)91
191
171
171
17[
]71
17[
]71
171
161
161
161
161
161
161
16[
]4[
]4[
]4[
]41
14[
]4[
141
131
131
131
131
131
131
131
12[
[2[
12[
]2[
]2[
]2[]2[
[0[
]01
101
10[
]01
101
101
THIS FORM IS SENT HOME TO THE PARENTS EACH WEEK FOR THEM TORETURN. COMMENTS:
REVIEW, SIGN, AND
101
APPENDIX M
SPECIAL IEP INVITATION
105
96
A SPECIAL "1EP" INVITATION
Teacher:
Student:
Date:
there will be a staffing to discuss the
academic and behavioral needs for the above student. Any ideas, thoughts, and
concerns you have regarding intervention will be appreciated. As always, the
multidisciplinary team (MDT) values your professional experience and input. I
am looking forward to working with you in making education more rewarding.
Sincerely,
106
APPENDIX N
DEFINITIONS: TRANSITION PROCEDURE, FORMS, AND PROCESSES
98
DEFINITIONS: TRANSITION/MAINSTREAMING
TRANSITION PROCEDURES: These procedures can be of assistance to each student'smultidisciplinary team with an appropriate criterion for determining the student's least restrictiveenvironment. The competency-based assessment can be used as a guideline for needed competencieswhen students transition out of the resource room. The competency-based assessment can also serveas a standard for validating a student's progress each year.
IEP INVITATION: This invitation will be sent to each regular classroom teacher at the junior high levelbefore each meeting related to individualized educational planning (IEP). This is a personal invitation fromthe resource room teacher to the regular classroom teacher/s letting them know that their experience,knowledge, and professionalism is valued and needed at all IEP staffings.
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS FLOWCHART: This flowchart is designed to assist the regularclassroom teachers with their understanding of the communication process for students in thetransition or mainstream process. On the backside of the flowchart there is a detailed explanation foreach step.
TEACHER RESPONSIBILITIES: These responsibilities serve as guidelines to ensure that eachstudent's transition or mainstream placement is successful. If needed, they can be modified forindividual student consideration. However, any modifications should be a combined effort between theregular classroom teacher and the resource room teacher.
COMPETENCY-BASED APPROACH TO TRANSITIONING AND MAINSTREAMING: Thecompetency-based assessment identifies a student's readiness qualities, behavioral/social qualities,instructional qualities, and academic qualities. These items are important because they outline thenecessary qualities needed in each student to ensure a successful transition back into the regularclassroom. If, at the time of transitioning or mainstreaming, any of the competencies are checked "No,"that competency must have a written plan to compensate for the negative marking.
MODIFIED RESOURCE ROOM SCHEDULE: This modified resource room schedule will be followed byeach student four weeks before entering the transition process. The modified schedule is designed tolessen the initial discomfort a student may have upon reentering the regular classroom.
STUDENT PROFILE: The student profile is designed to provide the regular classroom teacher with aclear understanding of the transitioned student's academic and behavioral characteristics. The profilewill also provide the regular classroom teacher with important information about the percentage of timethe student will be in the resource room and the regular classroom.
POSSIB1 E REGULAR CLASSROOM MODIFICATIONS: This list provides the regular classroomteacher with possible modifications to implement within their classroom. The suggestions address thefollowing areas: (1) classroom environment, (2) teaching approach, (3)student instruction/materials,(4) learning strategies, (5) classroom management, and (6) test construction and administration.Regular classroom teachers are encouraged to ask the resource room teacher for assistance with anyof these aforementioned possible modifications.
DAILY AND WEEKLY EVALUATION CARDS: After each core academic class period thetransitioned student will have the regular classroom teacher fill out a daily evaluation card for all areasthat apply during that class period. After the teacher fills out the evaluation card it will be returned tothe student. It is the student's responsibility to turn it in to the resource room teacher before the end ofthe school day. The transitioned student will remain on the "Daily Evaluation Cart:" until receiving "9" orhigher five consecutive days in a row. Following five consecutive days of 9's or higher the transitionedstudent starts the "Weekly Evaluation Card." The "Weekly Evaluation Card" is filled out on Thursdayeach week and returned to the resource room teacher. Having the "Weekly Evaluation Card" filled out onThursday will allow time for the resource room teacher to prepare an assignment for the student tocomplete over the weekend. If the transitioned student should become negligent in regular classroomresponsibilities the "Daily Evaluation Card" routine starts over.
BEST COPY AVAILABLE
103
Recommended